Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Kalam

Yeah, that’s not going to happen.

If he waits that long, Hillary’s name is already on the ballots, whether she is indicted or not, and indictment is not a disqualification for a candidate. Besides, there are plenty of other 3rd party candidates in the race as well. Even if there were only one candidate left, that wouldn’t give him any excuse to suspend an election. Lots of elections are held every year where only one candidate runs for the office, so that isn’t any kind of emergency.

Besides, people freak out everytime there is a Democrat president and say “he’ll suspend elections” (and the left freaks out and says the same thing every time there is a Republican president). It never happens.


31 posted on 06/03/2016 8:18:17 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: Boogieman

You are most likely correct about that scenario never playing out. However, your argument about having only one candidate to vote for has never been tried in a presidential election.

The issue of those third party candidates could be ruled as un-electable; hence nothing more than an indulgence to an antiquated dinosaur democratic form from the past. Again, executive order and poof law of the land.


43 posted on 06/03/2016 11:08:48 AM PDT by Kalam (<: The answer is 42 :>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson