1041
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 4 months ago

Correct.

And Kamala is the most logical choice, because there will be the least amount of legal hurdles, since she was already on the ticket.

And the Republicans already said they are going to mount legal challenges, which can easily lead to SCOTUS deciding the election. So I expect Sanders, AOC and progressives to strongly push for Kamala.

But I fully expect the DNC to push forward some corporate candidate like Bloomberg.

It's going to be interesting.

[-] SirDerpy@lemmy.world 18 points 4 months ago

There are no legal hurdles. The private organization can nominate whomever they want regardless of their votes and their rules.

[-] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago

The legal hurdles are around getting their candidate on state ballots

[-] SirDerpy@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Nice insight. Democratic Secretaries of State will find a way. But, Republican Secretaries of State will definitely resist.

I want to be of a mind that they made the bed to exclude third parties and now should lie in it. But, perhaps this is an opportunity to change the rules of ballot access for the better.

[-] audiomodder@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 4 months ago

The legal hurdles aren’t in the nomination, they’re in monies donated directly to the Biden/Harris campaign

[-] SirDerpy@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

The only way money is beholden to a campaign is because a major donor insisted upon it. And, no one is asking for a refund on executive and legislative influence.

[-] MeThisGuy@feddit.nl 0 points 4 months ago
[-] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 12 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

You think the DNC is going to try to push out the centrist, sitting vice president of their party during a presidential election? The vice presidential that aligns with the majority of their constituents, has a huge war chest of money, and is a well know and generally liked member of the party?

The DNC are idiots, but that makes no sense at all.

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Mike Bloomberg? He's older than Biden

[-] someguy3@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

How is it that states can decide (or whatever the correctt word is) who's on the ballot when the party hasn't even officially nominated a candidate? I know that political parties are separate from election institutions, but it seems very strange. And it seems very early for states to have it set in stone.

[-] alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 months ago

I am not a lawyer, but what is clear is that each State sets its own laws. By the constitution, States are in charge of elections.

What I have heard is that Biden has to release his delegates, who are already bound to him. Many states have already had their primaries completed with the Biden/Harris ticket winning.

Sending those electors to the Convention and letting them choose someone else is going to be a grey area.

If they choose Harris, it's pretty sound. When a president steps down, the VP becomes president, so there is definitely precedent and a legal basis.

But if Biden releases his delegates and lets them vote for anyone? That will be challenged and it will go to the supreme court. And SCOTUS is corrupt enough to find some flimsy legal excuse that helps Republicans.

So yeah, that's what I've heard. But I am not an expert.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 2 points 4 months ago

They can't. The nominee is chosen by the party and then communicated to the states. The states do have deadlines for being on it and this year some organizational genius scheduled the convention after the earliest deadline in Ohio. Ohio has since moved that deadline back, but the structure of the law leaves room for shenanigans so the DNC is moving forward with a virtual vote before the convention.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago

So legally it should be fine to decide at the DNC?

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 2 points 4 months ago

Yes, with a big asterisk on the "should". The law that pushes the deadline back may theoretically not go into effect until after the deadline is passed, and they paired it with some other campaign finance rules that are probably unconstitutional, so there's an outside chance the whole thing gets struck down.

All that said, the Democrats won't win Ohio for the presidential race. They want to be on the ballot to help turnout for the Democratic senator who's running at the same time. So if they took a risk and lost, it wouldn't be the end of the world.

this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2024
1041 points (99.3% liked)

News

23367 readers
3112 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS