Donald Trump initially said Kamala Harris shouldnā€™t be ā€œallowedā€ to run against him. Now he wants her ā€œforced offā€ the campaign trail.

ā€¦

Ahead of Election Day 2020, Trump saidĀ Joe BidenĀ shouldnā€™t have been ā€œallowedā€ to run for president. In July 2024, he saidĀ Kamala Harris shouldnā€™t be ā€œallowedā€ to run, either.

Four months later, asĀ a HuffPost reportĀ noted, the former president insisted that the Democratic vice president should now be ā€œforced offā€ the campaign trail.

In recent weeks, as the GOP nominee has struggled to come up with a coherent closing message, heā€™s fixated on a handful of preoccupations, including hisĀ desire to see Biden returnĀ to the ballot, hisĀ baseless ā€œ60 Minutesā€ conspiracy theoryĀ and his insistence thatĀ Harris should stop runningĀ against him.


šŸ—³ļø Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

  • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    210
    arrow-down
    2
    Ā·
    6 days ago

    You know who I think shouldnā€™t be allowed to run? The guy who tried to stage a coup.

    • corroded@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      3
      Ā·
      6 days ago

      Iā€™m going to go ahead and say convicted felons probably shouldnā€™t be eligible for the countryā€™s highest office, either.

        • RegalPotoo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          5
          Ā·
          5 days ago

          If your country is in a place where you donā€™t think banning felons from holding elected office is good because you are worried that the legislative branch will weaponize the judicial branch to stop their opposition from running, then Iā€™d suggest that the problem isnā€™t one that laws can fix

          • Asafum@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            27
            arrow-down
            1
            Ā·
            5 days ago

            It was a forethought, it was intentional. The ā€œfounding fathersā€ may have been super naive and absurd in some situations, but this is one they got correct. You donā€™t want to let the government decide who gets to run in that way because that will almost always be abused no matter what the current society is like.

            There are specific situations like what Colorado tried with Trump that makes sense and have a legal history, he was part of an insurrection, but for ā€œstandardā€ felonies itā€™s best that we donā€™t go down that road.

            • 51dusty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              Ā·
              5 days ago

              nevermind standard felonies. if it were almost any other federal position with access to classified material heā€™d never get a clearance, along with many other politicians; strictly based on business deals with foreign powers, debt and erratic behavior. why these people donā€™t have to go through the same minimum, non-political checks for access as other federal workers is beyond meā€¦ at the very least, he just doesnā€™t meet the minimum qualifications for access to material needed to perform his job.

              • Asafum@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                Ā·
                5 days ago

                If I understand correctly (however dumb I think it is) ā€œweā€ give him clearance by voting for him. We are supposed to be that check.

                Thatā€™s one place the founders fucked up, but also their system of elections was much different than it is now. I for one wouldnā€™t even be able to vote since I donā€™t own landā€¦ They never expected complete fucking morons and propagandized asshats to be voting. I believe they also expected the electors of the electoral college to override a vote for someone as bat shit crazy as Trumpā€¦