Posted on 07/03/2024 9:36:16 AM PDT by ChicagoConservative27
The Heritage Foundation vowed Wednesday to make it “extraordinarily difficult” for Democrats to replace President Joe Biden on the ballot.
“If the Biden family decides that President Biden will not run for re-election, the mechanisms for replacing him on ballots vary by state. There is the potential for pre-election litigation in some states that would make the process difficult and perhaps unsuccessful,” Heritage Oversight Project stated in a memo that was compiled in April and released last week ahead of President Joe Biden’s “disastrous” debate performance.
Heritage Oversight Project Executive Director Mike Howell, who authored the memo, said that replacing Biden would be “extraordinarily difficult” and that they would ensure it would make it “extraordinarily difficult” to replace the 46th president on the 2024 ticket.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
These are bigger issues than you make of them.
A candidate cannot merely hand over campaign contributions made to his or her campaign to a replacement, and why would they even want to? But you are also asking huge donors to accept that the replacement will represent their interests the same even if they’ve given as much as they intended to or even can. At the end of the day, everyone is in it for themselves. And money will greatly exacerbate this.
The convention dates are not an issue either. Conventions are supposed to revolve around the realities of the state laws, not vice versa. While Democrat party rules may allow swapping candidates, states have many laws about filing deadlines for candidates’ names being on the ballots or even being eligible to be counted as a write-in candidate. It won’t matter if the Democrats pick a new candidate if Biden still appears on some ballots. The courts are certainly not going to allow votes for one name to be applied to another candidate. And many electors are also bound by state law.
The bigger issue is that a switch of candidates is certainly going to peel off some votes and some participation, and this matters tremendously in a close election. If Biden had not run again or had been beaten in the primaries, a new candidate would have more momentum. Now any new candidate will face an uphill battle. And campaign finance and state voting laws will certainly play a huge factor in the outcome because even a small move in percentages will make or break the new candidate.
Regarding your confidence that a Biden replacement would appear on all state ballots, I suggest you consider that Newsweek magazine is bringing Heritage Foundation claims to the public discussion:
“According to the Heritage Foundation’s research, Georgia, Wisconsin and Nevada may prove particularly difficult for Democrats. It said that only death can remove a candidate’s name from a Wisconsin ballot, while Nevada’s deadline for changing candidates ended at 5 p.m. on the fourth Friday of June - in this case, June 28, 2024. Georgia allows candidates to withdraw up to 60 days before an election. If Biden withdrew after that date, which would be in early September, his name would remain on the ballot, but votes for him wouldn’t count. [And] some other states have no procedures to guide the replacement process, which would also open up huge areas of potential litigation.”
Someone help me out here. Why are there primaries and nominating conventions? Those processes aren’t even complete yet. Why is it too late to change a candidate now?
All 50 states had laws on the books about mail-in ballots but they ignored the heck out of them when it was prudent for THEM. That said, I agree with your conclusion.
The primaries are over. The American people have voted. Joe Biden is their nominee.
If that is true, I have thoroughly misunderstood the process for all of my 61 years on this earth.
I don’t think I have.
Holy Moses, you are spectacularly misinformed.
In a dangerously confident way.
Why do some people bother to post broad meaningless statements as if they had a point to make when they don’t? Save space. Put up or shut up.
Do you have even a single example to back up your ridiculously broad statement of “spectacularly misinformed”?
Not 10. Not 3. Just 1. Or post more if you’ve got ‘em. Just don’t make yourself look like a fool by making bold accusations with ZERO evidence.
In fact, your post #62 illustrates that you haven’t even reached the starting line and are less than zero on the subject because your question has been answered repeatedly on this forum already.
It does not matter that the Democrats can nominate whoever they like if that person is someone who cannot get his or her name on the ballot. Even if the sitting president had a team that failed to meet the state filing requirements to be on the ballot, guess what. His name, apart from winning a difficult legal challenge, would not appear on that state’s ballot. Can you name a single person who the Democrat party might nominate who has met the filing deadlines in all 50 states?
You can see here with links to original sources that all of the state filing deadlines for party candidates (not independent) have passed:
All I’ve pointed out is that getting the party’s nominee on the ballot in all 50 states is not automatic. In some cases, it would require a legislative or judicial act. It’s within the realm of possibility that the Democrat nominee would not make it on the ballot in every state (even if that outcome is not necessarily likely). But anyone who says otherwise is speaking from a position of ignorance. But double down if you wish.
You don’t rise to the level of “spectacularly misinformed” when your post doesn’t even begin at the starting gate. You’d have to have a point to even be “spectacularly misinformed”.
The Parliamentary Motive Behind the J6 Fedsurrection (Mar 12, 2023)
Sounds unrelated? Pelosi and Pence.
Fraud? vitiates everything.
Without this event, state elections would have been contested.
#2 Maybe Zelensky could donate some money to the democrats?
Why do some people bother to post broad meaningless statements as if they had a point to make when they don’t?
Because you are worth no more than a broad, true statement.
I don't try to teach trig to 3-year-olds either.
Whoever the Dem’s pick in their convention as their nominee will appear on all ballots, except perhaps Ohio where the deadline (the first in the nation) is August 7.
You are correct. Here is a link to the actual dates (not the state primary dates that some illiterates have been posting): National Association of Secretaries of State: State Laws Regarding Presidential Ballot Access
Excellent. Thanks.
LOL. You clearly confused your lack of ability with a lack of willingness.
The reason you are unable to teach has nothing to do with my ability to learn.
It has everything to do with the fact that you cannot impart what you do not possess.
Also, some state requirements aren't clear. Arizona & Georgia's May and June dates can't be true.
| State | 2024 Date |
|---|---|
| Alabama | August 15, 2024 |
| Alaska | September 19, 2024 |
| Arizona | May 7, 2024 |
| Arkansas | September 15, 2024 |
| California | October 1, 2024 |
| Colorado | September 6, 2024 |
| Connecticut | Dependent on state convention |
| Delaware | September 1, 2024 |
| District of Columbia | August 7, 2024 |
| Florida | September 1, 2024 |
| Georgia | June 7, 2024 |
| Hawaii | September 6, 2024 |
| Idaho | September 1, 2024 |
| Illinois | Dependent on state convention |
| Indiana | September 10, 2024 |
| Iowa | August 16, 2024 |
| Kansas | Dependent on national convention |
| Kentucky | September 6, 2024 |
| Louisiana | September 3, 2024; September 6, 2024 |
| Maine | Dependent on party convention |
| Maryland | September 6, 2024; October 6, 2024 |
| Massachusetts | September 10, 2024 |
| Michigan | Dependent on state convention |
| Minnesota | August 26, 2024 |
| Mississippi | September 6, 2024 |
| Missouri | Dependent on national convention |
| Montana | Prescribed by secretary of state |
| Nebraska | September 1, 2024; September 8, 2024 |
| Nevada | September 3, 2024 |
| New Hampshire | October 29, 2024 |
| New Jersey | Dependent on national convention |
| New Mexico | September 10, 2024 |
| New York | Dependent on primary election |
| North Carolina | August 5, 2024 |
| North Dakota | September 3, 2024 |
| Ohio | August 7, 2024 |
| Oklahoma | August 27, 2024 |
| Oregon | August 27, 2024 |
| Pennsylvania | September 17, 2024 |
| Rhode Island | September 6, 2024 |
| South Carolina | September 3, 2024 |
| South Dakota | August 13, 2024 |
| Tennessee | September 3, 2024 |
| Texas | August 27, 2024 |
| Utah | September 6, 2024 |
| Vermont | September 2, 2024 |
| Virginia | August 23, 2024 |
| Washington | September 6, 2024 |
| West Virginia | August 13, 2024 |
| Wisconsin | September 3, 2024 |
| Wyoming | September 6, 2024 |
You can see here with links to original sources that all of the state filing deadlines for party candidates (not independent) have passed:
Have you alerted the Harris campaign? 🤣
Mike Johnson: It will be litigated.
There are endless campaign finance laws being violated by Democrats while they have launched a massive and highly illegal lawfare campaign against a former sitting president and current presidential frontrunner.
Whether justice will prevail remains to be seen. It hasn’t so far.
But I for one don’t buy the legality or morality of the ol’ switcheroo. If you support it, that’s up to you.
Biden and Harris both belong in prison as far as I’m concerned. The reality that half of the country supports them means that civil war is the only possible way for there to be any hope of fixing what’s broken. Even then, it’s a very slim chance. Razor thin.
If you support it, that’s up to you.
Nice deflection. I never suggested that I support it.
You had a month to learn, but you are still pushing your low IQ point of view....with an old Newsweak article.
See you when the ballots come out. Prepare your excuses because I will be right.
unlearner July 3, 2024: Because the primaries already happened AND, more importantly, the filing deadlines have passed in every state.
“Since you seem to want to move the goalposts, here’s a reminder of your claim:
unlearner July 3, 2024: Because the primaries already happened AND, more importantly, the filing deadlines have passed in every state.”
That’s one small detail in a larger conversation. From the same thread (https://freerepublic.com/focus/news/4248576/posts?page=66#66) you conveniently ignored, I said, “All I’ve pointed out is that getting the party’s nominee on the ballot in all 50 states is not automatic. In some cases, it would require a legislative or judicial act. It’s within the realm of possibility that the Democrat nominee would not make it on the ballot in every state (even if that outcome is not necessarily likely).”
Alabama amended its rules to allow the change of candidates:
https://alison.legislature.state.al.us/files/pdf/SearchableInstruments/2024RS/SB324-enr.pdf
Ohio temporarily extended its deadline to certify candidates to September 1:
https://www.ohiosos.gov/media-center/press-releases/2024/2024-07-25/
So, if ANY candidate the Democrats nominate is AUTOMATICALLY GUARANTEED to be on EVERY state ballot as you assert, WHY did some states have to change their rules?
The bigger problem is that you, like many quislings, gleefully accept the injustice of the selective application of the law between liberals and conservatives, between Marxists and patriots, as if it is normative. You act like it is perfectly fine and normal for the Democrats to constantly change the rules (and in this case the candidate on the top of their ticket for no other reason than he wasn’t performing well).
The Democrats (and plenty of RINOs) did everything they could to keep Trump off the ballot. They’ve claimed he had no executive privilege to documents that he had the authority to declassify and probably incriminated the deep state. They’ve held a trial to impeach him for insurrection when nothing he said or did warranted such a ridiculous claim. They’ve accused him of sexual assault when all of the evidence exonerates him. They’ve invented crimes out of thin air. They’ve investigated him for being spied on illegally by the previous administration. They’ve ran him through the courts with multiple perjured testimonies and provenly crooked prosecutors. They’ve unlawfully appointed, funded, and colluded with prosecutors. They’ve threatened, harassed, and committed blood libel. They tried to murder him.
And yet he still stands.
On the other hand, the Obamas, Bidens, Harris and all of the Democrat leadership is fully corrupt. Hillary and Joe Biden had illegally possessed classified documents that were compromised and it was PROVEN with inquiries (not investigations), and nothing was prosecuted.
Yes, you may be right that Harris, or any other candidate the Democrats nominate may effortlessly get carte blanche everywhere and the rules don’t apply to them. But it’s not something to celebrate. You have nothing to gloat about.
It’s almost a foregone conclusion that the Democrats will get their way in the corrupted justice system and current political landscape (iow, media and big tech bias, etc.). But it should not go uncontested. And that’s what your view represents: just lay down and surrender without a fight.
No thanks. Not going to join you.
I say, DON’T GIVE THEM ONE INCH.
Remember, it would have only taken one more inch for them to have succeeded in assassinating Donald Trump.
I’ll join him instead and support what he said when he got up from the attempted assassination: FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!
That’s one small detail in a larger conversation.
Sorry, I'm not playing that game. I'm holding YOU to what YOU said. No diversions. No personal innuendo. No, "I'm with Trump, and you're not" BS.
Only what YOU claimed to be true and correct. (...the filing deadlines have passed in every state.)
“I’m holding YOU to what YOU said... [that] the filing deadlines have passed in every state.”
After further contemplation, I have to admit I was wrong and need to quit defending my wrong position and making excuses.
On that specific issue, you were right. I was wrong. I misunderstood the significance of those deadlines. Honestly, I’m still not sure what purpose they serve since they don’t seem to matter in any way.
I raised the stakes by arguing with you over this and I lost.
Sorting credible info on the Internet from the less-than-credible has gotten harder lately. And I trusted some of the less-than-credible sources who were wrong. But no excuses. Time for me to man up.
And you are right about me trying to deflect. Disagreeing with me on something does not make you less of a Trump supporter, especially when there are specific cases where you were right and I was wrong. I should have given this more careful consideration before my defensively written previous post.
So, what do you anticipate happening as a result of this switch going forward? Do you see any likelihood of success in litigating things like the transfer of campaign donations?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.