▲ 177 ▼ GOP sees turnout disaster without Trump (thehill.com) submitted 3 years ago by YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world 47 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Treczoks@kbin.social 1 point 3 years ago (2 children) See paragraph 3. That might pose a problem for Trump. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago* (1 child) o person shall be a Senator 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, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability. Emphasized the bold part because I don't quite understand why we would want that to even be an option. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hamsterkill@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 3 years ago I imagine the thinking is that if a rebellion has 2/3 support in both houses of Congress, it was probably popular enough to not be disqualifying. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago* (1 child) o person shall be a Senator 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, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability. Emphasized the bold part because I don't quite understand why we would want that to even be an option. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hamsterkill@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 3 years ago I imagine the thinking is that if a rebellion has 2/3 support in both houses of Congress, it was probably popular enough to not be disqualifying. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hamsterkill@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 3 years ago I imagine the thinking is that if a rebellion has 2/3 support in both houses of Congress, it was probably popular enough to not be disqualifying. permalink fedilink source parent