Swallow anything you have in your mouth before clicking
- Thread starter vraiblonde
- Start date
OccamsRazor
Well-Known Member
Why are you fighting so desperately to be right about something that has absolutely no possibility of happening?
AnthonyJames
R.I.P. My Brother Rick
"When it comes to the law, nothing is understood" ~ Dragline
He suffers a sad pathetic life and it's all he's got?Why are you fighting so desperately to be right about something that has absolutely no possibility of happening?
gemma_rae
Well-Known Member
"Sometimes nothin' is a real cool hand" Lucas Jackson - War hero
HemiHauler
Well-Known Member
Wow.
Just wow.
Let's look at Article I, Section III, shall we?
US Constitution said:
Now let's look at Joe Biden. He was born on November, 20, 1942.
His first Senate election was won in 1972. That election would have been held on November 7, 1972. Just in case your math is as piss-poor as your reading comprehension, that would put him at 29 years of age on election day, not to mention the campaign.
You can't be as effing stupid as you appear .... can you?
Or are you going say he illegally ascended to that Senate seat?
HemiHauler
Well-Known Member
Why are you fighting so desperately to be right about something that has absolutely no possibility of happening?
I couldn't care less if she runs or not. I can read the Constitution. Can you?
Clem72
Well-Known Member
It's the requirement to hold the office, not the requirement to campaign for or be nominated for the office. Those processes are not outlined in the constitution and have indeed changed over the years (changes in primary processes, caucus processes, etc.)
If you are trying to tell me age is a factor in the nomination process, please also tell me where in the constitution it says a candidate can be nominated through a coin-toss (like good ole mrs. clinton).
HemiHauler
Well-Known Member
It's amazing to me that you have to explain that ... ESPECIALLY when it's quite well explained in plain English in our gottdayum Constitution!
And as to your second point, National parties are private entities and can do whatever they want. Whom they nominate has NOTHING to do with the Constitution.
Those will be mail-in
Toxick
Splat
I can, but I'm not.
The hostility, though....
I'll not say that.
And ignoring the "apples and oranges" fallacy, since we're talking about two disparate and distinct offices and disparate and distinct sections of the Constitution, for now, I have reviewed the section you've cited.
And I'm looking for the word "candidate" and "eligible" in that section.....
And I'm not finding it.
I do, however, see the phrase "be a Senator".
Which has a distinct and disparate meaning from: "be eligible to that [Presidential] Office"
OR! You can quit being such a pedantic douche nozzle. You think it makes you look like a intaleckshul but it doesn't - it just makes you look like a loser permavirgin who has nothing better to do with their pathetic life than pick stupid arguments with strangers on the internet.
HemiHauler
Well-Known Member
And there it is!
Reading the Constitution for what is actually says is pedantic and that adjective is conveyed as a pejorative.
For reading the Constitution as it is written.
YOU are the loser.
AOC puts acumen in her taco mix. She's spicy like that.
No, YOU are the loser AND the nose picker AND the booger eater AND the guy who scratches his butthole then smells his fingers.
You ****ing moron.
Toxick
Splat
Yeah. I know the feeling.
It has almost - but not quite - as negative a connotation as "effing stupid"
HemiHauler
Well-Known Member
We're discussing the Constitutional meaning, not the dictionary meaning, you ****ing moron.
