Remote View
Claudia De la Cruz slams Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision to kick her off 2024 ballot
Claudia De la Cruz slams Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision to kick her off 2024 ballot
You're viewing a single thread.
73 comments
-
Democrats do not want democracy
-
Weird thing to say about a group that routinely takes majorities in national elections.
Surely a party that, on a good day, gets 1% of the vote, and on a bad day, can’t manage to file the right paperwork to get on the ballot, is really what the people want.
-
Oh man wait til you hear about the Workers Party of Korea if election success is your measurement of democracy support.
-
Yes, that’s definitely a relevant and insightful comparison to the US electoral system.
-
If electoral success is your standard, then yes. The US is way more comparable to third world fascist states than anyone wants to admit, and a dominant political party leveraging its power to ban competition is one such similarity.
-
I thought this decision was made by the Pennsylvania state Supreme Court because they didn’t follow that state’s rules for eligibility.
-
For extra context the PA supreme court is majority democrat
-
Are you arguing that the decision wasn’t made by the Pennsylvania state Supreme Court because they didn’t follow that state’s rules for eligibility?
-
Yes
-
You might want to read this.
-
-
-
-
following a challenge supported by the Democratic donor-funded, anti-third-party Clear Choice PAC.
Every story you ever see about a candidate being thrown off a ballot is prompted by a democratic effort to do so. There are multiple such stories posted today, ill let you go look into their context.
-
The Pennsylvania high court agreed with a Commonwealth Court decision to bar De la Cruz and her running mate, Karina Garcia, from the ballot.
That’s the rest of the sentence that you forgot about.
Every story you ever see about a candidate being thrown off a ballot is prompted by a democratic effort to do so.
Did you even read the second paragraph because it’s about a republican effort to remove a candidate.
Pennsylvania justices also ruled against the Constitution Party's James Clymer, whose name was listed as a placeholder for the party, delivering a victory to Republicans.
-
None of this addresses any of my accusations?
-
I’m pointing out that your accusation is fundamentally flawed.
-
Oh whoops, i did say only democrats do it. I didnt know there even were conservative third parties still around. I democrats and republicans are anti-democratic
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Surely a party that, on a good day, gets 1% of the vote, and on a bad day, can’t manage to file the right paperwork to get on the ballot, is really what the people want.
Well, if they are so incompetent and unwanted, then the Democrats shouldn't worry about them being on the ticket, right? So why are you all so angry about them?
-
What this poster doesn't get is: when the country is divided 50.4 to 49.6, that 1% coming off the Left becomes suddenly VERY meaningful in a FPTP system like the USA. Doubly so when our antiquated electoral system means ties go to the 49.6 party due to gerrymandering. TRIPLY so when the result of that 49.6% controlling our country is Project 2025 and Fascist jackboots on the necks of disadvantaged people here. Keep in mind that there are very real efforts by dishonest actors to puh these memes to further divide the Left and ensure that the Authoritarian jackboots come out. While I won't (and indeed can't thanks to Mods tying our hands behind our backs about this effort with rule 3) say that for sure, this post or this poster is part of that effort, I will let the hyperlink above speak for itself and remind you that yes, it is happening.
-
While I won’t (and indeed can’t thanks to Mods tying our hands behind our backs about this effort with rule 3) say that for sure, this post or this poster is part of that effort
What do you mean? Just what is it that are you accusing me of?
-
Here you go trying to bait people into making rule breaking comments so you can report them and play the victim again…
-
It was a quite transparent attempt by this poster to try to get my words silenced by the Mods while it spews this ongoing nonsense unchallenged. I will make this accusation: the posters in this particular faction take great offence to having their posts challenged. They get all offended and shit when people point out that their posts are full of logical fallacies, dishonest tactics, and attacks that are thinly vailed, skirting the lines of the Rules, and even occasionally exceeding the rules, testing the limits. They hate it when you point out that yes, there is an active effort to split our vote so the Republicans win and shit on everything these people claim to support, and they are supporting that effort, no matter whether or not they're willing, paid, or just duped. Just see this exchange for a perfect example.
-
They display that big hall monitor energy.
-
More like little bully kids who get shown up then run to teacher and twist words to get the kid who showed them up in trouble.
-
-
-
-
Not the person you asked, but here is rule 3 from the sidebar (emphasis mods; not mine):
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban
-
I'll have to give the poster credit for trying to bait me, but I really don't have to answer that. I said what I said, reader. Follow the links and look at this poster's posts (all of them), and make your own conclusions.
-
I’ll have to give the poster credit for trying to bait me, but I really don’t have to answer that.
I wasn't baiting. You've made several comments implying that I'm part of some vast conspiracy, and then you say that ya can't go into details because you have your "hands tied behind" your back due to mods.
Honestly, man, sometimes people just don’t agree with you. It doesn’t always have to be a massive conspiracy. Almost everyone on Lemmy disagrees with me every day, but I don’t go around feeling powerless because of it. Lol.
look at this poster’s posts (all of them), and make your own conclusions.
Sure, let's make it easier. Here's the link to my posts: https://lemmy.world/u/UniversalMonk?page=1&sort=New&view=Posts
Most of my posts are about socialist causes because that’s what I believe in and care about. More than once, you've said variations of, “Check his posts! Check his posts!” as if that’s some kind of threat or 'gotcha.'
But my posts are public, and I stand by all of them. I’ve even shared a link to make it easier for you.
Seriously, man, calm down. We don’t agree with each other, and that’s fine. No one, including the mods, is tying your hands behind your back.
-
Man, this is some good bait
-
I don't know what you mean.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Exactly. Dems don’t have to worry about her being on the ticket because she’s incompetent.
-
This is like saying the dude blocking traffic by wandering around in the street ranting to himself is a “threat to the automobile industry’s power so they must be afraid of him”.
-
if the automobile industry takes the matter to the state supreme Court, I would be asking if they're onto something
-
-
-
-
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤡
Yes, the Democrats don't want democracy at all because they follow the laws and regulations required to get a candidate into the actual elections, and aren't complete fools who show up late to the party accusing everyone else for being the problem.
It's clearly Democrats' fault that this ticket is incompetent. You ever wonder why they're only making noise in swing states and not bothering with the Bible Belt states at all?
Ever wonder why that may be?
-
Green party didnt show up late, they did all they needed to do and on time
-
Also wrong. See Nevada.
My comment isn't about the Green Party in this thread.
-
Yeah, im talking about Nevada too. What should they have done differently, they even went to the secretary of state to make sure they were doing things right. How many frivolous obstacles do you want to put in the way of letting people vote for someone?
-
TLDR: you can't feign ignorance by actually being stupid because they didn't read the materials and recognize the form was wrong.
-
Jesus christ you get the form straight from the secretary of state and youre gonna call them stupid for thinking its valid? This is obvious sabotage, how can you have no criticism of the secretary, the person in charge of running the election, for handing out bogus forms.
-
As the judge said: they didn't read the packet, which CLEARLY shows the form, form type, fields noting the form...etc.
They fucked up.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Democrats do not want democracy
It definitely looks that way, doesn't it? They wanna hold on their duopoly power just as much as the repubicans do. lol
-
I definitely looks that way
That’s a good point. I’m starting to think they fill out the paperwork wrong just to fuel their persecution complex…
🤔
Easier than actually doing the hard work to get elected.
-
That distinguishes this case from the one involving the Green Party in Nevada - where they had the right paperwork, but were told by the officials of the State to use the wrong set and then got disqualified for it.
For the latter - usually, if the gov't screws up, they usually have to do something to fix it (either allow the outdated paperwork that they said would work, to actually work - or extend the deadline to two weeks from now to file the correct paperwork, or something).
-
-
-
73 comments