• CubbyTustard@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m sorry but your interpretation doesn’t make any sense to me. We should let him run and then if he wins just say nah? If you can’t cross the finish line then you shouldn’t be in the race.

    • tburkhol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s easy to forget that US political parties are not actually the government. They’re just people who get together for common purpose, like a book club or a softball team. Those parties can run whomever they want in their primaries, and the states have no role until it gets to putting people on the real election ballot. At that point, if someone puts in their name and they’re too young, not a citizen, not a human (looking at you Idyllwild), or otherwise ineligible, it becomes the job of the state not to put them on the ballot, regardless of whether they’re sponsored by a party or not.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree. He shouldn’t be. But that doesn’t mean lawyers and judges agree.

      the ballots and election process are largely left to the states. (Baring violations of the CRA, etc,)

      Keep in mind, at the moment, it’s state supreme courts and their rules they’re voting on (as deciddd by MN Supreme Court , recently. The judge made a very wink-wink-hint-hint note in his ruling saying it “may” not be the same case in the main election)

      • CubbyTustard@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think i understand now, you’re saying the 14th can’t apply to state races, only the resultant federal outcome? that’s interesting i hadn’t considered it like that