• matjoeman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Primaries use public voting infrastructure, at least in my state, so I can see the argument that courts can decide who is a legal primary candidate.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The risk is what the GOP is threatening to do in Colorado. If Trump isn’t allowed on the public voting infrastructure, they’ll just caucus instead.

      In which case, it’s likely that independents won’t be allowed to participate.

      So for primaries, it’s likely to have the opposite effect, more likely for a Trump candidacy, by stirring up the base and locking out potential moderate voters.

      For general election, Maine and Colorado don’t practically matter, they were never going to go to trump anyway. So for these two states, it’s ammunition for a persecution complex without good result. For it to be a good strategic win, it would have to be some states that Trump actually has a chance of winning.

      • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The risk is what the GOP is threatening to do in Colorado. If Trump isn’t allowed on the public voting infrastructure, they’ll just caucus instead.

        They have every right to. Again, because a primary isn’t an election for office, it’s a private entity (in this case the GOP) being allowed to borrow public infrastructure to help them decide who they want to back for the actual election.

        Same reason super delegates for the Dems weren’t illegal, even if they were in bad faith.

        • jj4211@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s perfectly in their rights, but not what an effort seeking to prevent a Trump candidacy should want.

          • WarmApplePieShrek@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            If the state ruled Trump can’t be on the primary ballot because he’s ineligible to be president, then he can’t be on the main ballot because he’s ineligible to be president. That means no Republican will be on the ballot, and that’s really bad for the Republicans.

            • jj4211@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Trump missing from the ballot in Colorado and Maine would not make a difference, they don’t vote Republican in the general election anyway.

              You’d need this to happen in a vaguely competitive state. Judging from the progress of various attempts, that doesn’t seem likely, unless the supreme Court declared it nationally, but I don’t see that happening even if they let Colorado and Maine stand.

              So you have got a bunch of Trump die hards inspired to “fight like hell” in the face of what they describe as an injustice, all to block him in a state he wasn’t going to win anyway.

              Now if you pulled this off in some place like Georgia, Florida, Texas, then sure, that would be quite the blow and may persuade the GOP voters to really around some other candidate that would be more tolerable. But Colorado and Maine aren’t going to really help general election results.