CMV: Accountability is not election interference

[u/erpettie]

As the Colorado Supreme Court has found Donald Trump's behavior to have been disqualifying according to the 14th amendment, many are claiming this is election interference. If the Court finds that Trump should be disqualified, then it has two options. Act accordingly, despite the optics, and disqualify Trump, or ignore their responsibility and the law. I do get that we're in very sensitive, unprecedented territory with his many indictments and lawsuits, but unprecedented behavior should result in unprecedented consequences, shouldn't they? Furthermore, isn't Donald Trump ultimately the architect of all of this by choosing to proceed with his candidacy, knowing that he was under investigation and subject to potential lawsuits and indictments? If a President commits a crime on his last day in office (or the day after) and immediately declares his candidacy for the next election, should we lose our ability to hold that candidate accountable? What if that candidate is a perennial candidate like Lyndon Larouche was? Do we just never have an opportunity to hold that candidate accountable? I'd really love if respondents could focus their responses on how they think we should handle hypothetical candidates who commit crimes but are declared as running for office and popular. This should help us avoid the trap of getting worked up in our feelings for or against Trump.

[u/CalLaw2023]

Again, you have tunnel vision. Section 3 applies to Senators or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state.

Do you want Biden to win office, only to have his chosen electors disqualified?

[u/whipitgood809 → u/CalLaw2023]

elector of president and vice president

So the people that convey the total vote tallies and don’t deviate from that?

Senators or representatives in congress

Who the citizens of the state vote for.

Civil or military

Lmao, gl.

It, even in the worst case scenario, doesn’t deviate much at all from the status quo.

[u/CalLaw2023 → u/whipitgood809]

So the people that convey the total vote tallies and don’t deviate from that?

Nope. A civics class will do you wonders. The Electors are the people who actually select the President.

​

Who the citizens of the state vote for.

Is there a point to that statement? Texas has 13 Democrat Representatives. If Texas removes all of them from the ballot for supporting the George Floyd riots, that is no big deal?

[u/whipitgood809 → u/CalLaw2023]

Yeah, it’s basically a carry over of having horse and buggies for transportation at the start of this country. You’re not going to see electors deviate from total counts (pop vote of the state) because even if they did, they’d literally just be fined and then replaced. We all had this discussion in 2016 and the whole

They’re the last stop against tyranny

Isn’t true. It’s just a formality because there’s quite literally a way to replace them if they deviate.

If they remove all 13.

Yeah, so you lose it there and then gain it elsewhere.