Colorado Supreme Court bars Trump from the ballot

What happened is that around 30 years ago Carroll was in a department store shopping. Trump saw her there, they were acquaintances and they started talking. I'd describe it as bantering back and forth. She said she was going to try something on. Trump invited himself into the dressing room. Pushed her up against the wall. Fingered her vagina and then tried to insert his penis. She managed to get her leg up between them and pushed him away. She then ran out of the store. Called her friend and described the scary story. Her friend then exclaimed to Carrol that she had been raped. Carroll told another friend that day about the incident.

Carroll at the time was a writer for Saturday Night Live. She had many other writing jobs for the entertainment industry over the years. Being retired she wrote a biography and released it a couple of years ago. The Trump rape story was in the book and that is how this sad story got new life and why Trump started defaming Carroll.

 

"Git th' rope, Clem."
"Naw, Zeke. This 'un calls fer Th' Chair. Ah'm gittin' 't ready.
Mercy me! Lookit all them sparks! Whut a glorious sight!"

 

Oh, it's a lot of things, including those pointed out above by others. There's also sometimes a reluctance to testify by the victim. Being the victim of a serious crime can mean being re-victimized in the trial process. This is less of a problem now than it was 30 years ago but remember how Congress victimized Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas hearings? Criminal trials are worse.

 

The courts won't get him.

The 14th Amendment won't get him.

Congress won't get him.

Only the voters can do it. Will they?

 

It was a little weird to have States trying to interfere in the political process. I am not a supporter of the former President but a great deal of this and the prosecution of him seems to be political. As unsavory as he is, that isn't a good look on our political system. I believe even Putin was joking about it (yeah look at you guys).

I don't get why people would vote for Trump. But I don't get why people would vote for Biden either. Biden is cognitively out to lunch. As the recent report noted, he is an elderly man fumbling around. It is like the days of the Soviet Union where Brezhnev wasn't competent and the behind the scenes people were running things and using Brezhnev for photo ops and TV stuff. People trying to maintain Biden's cognitive fitness for the job are deluded.

 

Yes, and so am I. And from my experience - I know you're right. People like Joe and me should NOT be President or Prime Minister of any place. I think Joe is a nice guy. Let him spend some time posting here -- much more suitable.

No. They're deluding others - intentionally. It perpetuates their own jobs. Entirely self-interest.

I do, especially if they're misogynists or xenophobes. Or under indictment for felonies. He's the poster guy, for those folks. And there are the Coal people, the Anti-Climate change crowd, the so-called "Anti-Woke" crowd and the Religious Right... they all like him.

 

Kind of hard to see what else the Court could have done, though. The text gives Congress the sole power to waive the restriction, so it seemed to me that Congress has the sole power to bar a candidate.

 

Politicians, in addition to age, also have agendas. And political skills to see at least some of them through. And teams.
I heard some people concerned with Biden age saying things like "I would vote for Haley instead if she gets nominated". Because she's younger. Really? She has her positions, too, and while not unhinged like Trump, they're pretty darn right wing. Candidates are not, in fact, "all the same".

 

The power to waive, to me, implies that the candidate could be barred by someone else. Might not mean "the states", though.

 

“Right wing” or otherwise, in many ways she is potentially a path to return to a desired normalcy in the wake of eight years of hyper partisanship. If either of the two leading candidates wins it will likely be four additional years of resentment, dysfunction, and increasing hostility from a significant portion of the electorate at varying levels and risks. Oh how I long for the path to electability for third, fourth, and fifth party candidates.

 

Nonsense. Biden and Haley are both mainstream politicians; if anything, Haley is the one who is more "extreme". They both will pacify the independents and the normies, and they both will enrage Papa Trump cultists. So by all means, vote for Haley - if you are a Republican or a (sane) conservative. Picking Haley because "Biden's too old" is not a valid reason. She's not "Biden, but younger"; that would be Harris or Buttigieg - if they were running.

There would be 1 serious positive if Haley by some miracle wins the nomination: both she and Biden are on record supporting Ukraine. I'll grant her that.

 

Nothing says this system is broken and the average voter (who actually votes) is deficient like Biden and Trump being top of their party's ticket.

It is a scenario along the lines of a Dumb and Dumber Hollywood Extravaganza. On one side we have a WWF (you and me cage match) candidate. And on the other a semi lucid, shuffling, elderly man. Why do I hear "Twilight Zone" by Golden Earring playing in the background.

 

These. Two. Are. Not. Remotely. Comparable. Except in that both are old.

 

Biden is 81.

Trump is 77 + 91.

The difference could not be more stark.

 

Yes. It's old and in decline, vs. old, vicious and mentally flat-lined. One is way worse than the other -- but neither are good - or even acceptable, in a President. There are age limits for Senators in Canada and, some effective age restrictions on Cardinals in the Roman Catholic Church:

Britannica: "In 1970 Paul VI directed that cardinals who reach age 75 are to be asked to resign, and those who do not resign are to relinquish the right to vote for a pope when they reach age 80. Paul further decreed that the number of voting cardinals be limited to 120."

I think there should be age limits on Presidents and Prime Ministers as well. And an age limit of 0 for Dictators. Or maybe like driving privileges after 80 (here). Look at the driver's health and skills every year. Then decide.

 

We currently have five political parties in Canada. I consider a vote for any one of them a throw-away. But I prefer our mess over the US mess. Ours is 'mild and lazy.' US mess is 'wild and crazy' - diabolical, as I see it.

 

Only 18 years older and served nearly 50 years before? Seems about right.

 

There are structural reasons that third parties do not prevail. Ours is a largely winner-take-all system not given to proportioned governing and coalition-building.

No third-party candidate has ever won the presidency. You have to go back a century or more to find any that have even won any ballots in the EC--with two exceptions: Thurmond and Wallace. But both of those were a reflection of the seismic shift of racists moving from one party to another.

I don't think it's a matter of psychology or will. There is simply no room on our system for 3rd place. For a third party to exist it must supplant one of the two leading parties, returning us to the two-party system, with the other party dying off. And even that hasn't happened in a very long time.