Nationalized Voting

#2
#2
  • Like
Reactions: Vol737, LouderVol, Good Ol' Charlie Brown and 2 others
#3
#3
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen, Vol737, 85SugarVol and 5 others
#4
#4
The following taken from the article should tell you all you want to know. Trump only wants to “nationalize” elections in the areas he knows he can’t flip. Horrible idea.

Under the Constitution, states set the rules for both federal and state elections, establishing "the times, places, and manner of holding elections for the House of Representatives and the Senate

"The Republicans should say, 'We want to take over,'" Trump told Bongino. "We should take over the voting ... in at least many, 15 places. The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting. We have states that are so crooked and they're counting votes."
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen, MontyPython, FLVOL_79 and 6 others
#5
#5
NorthDallas40 said:
The following taken from the article should tell you all you want to know. Trump only wants to “nationalize” elections in the areas he knows he can’t flip. Horrible idea.

Under the Constitution, states set the rules for both federal and state elections, establishing "the times, places, and manner of holding elections for the House of Representatives and the Senate

"The Republicans should say, 'We want to take over,'" Trump told Bongino. "We should take over the voting ... in at least many, 15 places. The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting. We have states that are so crooked and they're counting votes."
Click to expand...
Agreed. The next part of the quote was "We have states that I won that show I didn't win" (funny that Fox cut it off immediately before that) and then he started ranting about the 2020 election again.

 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#6
#6
Lawrence Wright said:

President Donald Trump urges Republicans to 'take over' voting systems | Fox News

President Donald Trump urged Republicans to "take over" and "nationalize" voting in 15 states, prompting Chuck Schumer to call the comments "outlandishly illegal."
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com

Good idea or not?
Click to expand...
I'm going to profess ignorance.

Number 1: What is he talking about?

Number 2: As a general principle, if the Constitution does not grant it to the Federal government, I'm against it. Trump needs to butt out of nationalizing elections. Federalize it and when Dems gain control again, we'll have institutionalized cheating going forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol737, 85SugarVol, Vol since 77 and 3 others
#7
#7
There's been discussion about related topics in other threads including the 2026 Midterms Thread.
Trump may be talking about setting more standardized rules such as for ID requirements.
Article 1 of the constitution says that states get first shot at setting up voting procedures but Congress can also set up standardized regulations as needed.

Section. 4.​

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a different Day.


The SAVE Act is likely to be debated soon in the Senate. It is intended to set some standardized requirements such as proof of citizenship and photo IDs.
thefederalist.com

How Senate GOP Can SAVE Trump’s Presidency And Wreck Dems

A voter ID filibuster would be a 24/7 GOP campaign ad.
thefederalist.com thefederalist.com

To me it's not a yes/no question, but it's a question of how far the Congress should go in setting standardized regulations.
 
#8
#8
NorthDallas40 said:
The following taken from the article should tell you all you want to know. Trump only wants to “nationalize” elections in the areas he knows he can’t flip. Horrible idea.

Under the Constitution, states set the rules for both federal and state elections, establishing "the times, places, and manner of holding elections for the House of Representatives and the Senate

"The Republicans should say, 'We want to take over,'" Trump told Bongino. "We should take over the voting ... in at least many, 15 places. The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting. We have states that are so crooked and they're counting votes."
Click to expand...

You left out the part of the Constitution that says "Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators."
 
#9
#9
Lawrence Wright said:

President Donald Trump urges Republicans to 'take over' voting systems | Fox News

President Donald Trump urged Republicans to "take over" and "nationalize" voting in 15 states, prompting Chuck Schumer to call the comments "outlandishly illegal."
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com

Good idea or not?
Click to expand...
Sounds like just more Trump babel. Even without reading the link just from the blurb how do you "nationalize" voting in 15 states? You either nationalize Federal elections or you don't.

In any case once the babbling is set aside I don't see any way to have that actually happen legally without some serious changes.
 
#10
#10
hndog609 said:
Sounds like just more Trump babel. Even without reading the link just from the blurb how do you "nationalize" voting in 15 states? You either nationalize Federal elections or you don't.

In any case once the babbling is set aside I don't see any way to have that actually happen legally without some serious changes.
Click to expand...
I agree that it's a normal example of Trump running his mouth like when he said he would invade Greenland.
He has no right to federalize elections, but Congress can set standardized rules.

Hat tip to @Orange_Crush.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S4-C1-3/ALDE_00013640/
The [Elections] Clause is a default provision; it invests the States with responsibility for the mechanics of congressional elections but only so far as Congress declines to pre-empt state legislative choices. Thus, it is well settled that the Elections Clause grants Congress ‘the power to override state regulations’ by establishing uniform rules for federal elections, binding on the States. ‘The regulations made by Congress are paramount to those made by the State legislature; and if they conflict therewith, the latter so far as the conflict extends, ceases to be operative.'16
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Crush
#11
#11
USF grad in TN said:
You left out the part of the Constitution that says "Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators."
Click to expand...
I’m ok with leaving that out. Because there is zero chance Congress does a thing if they even have the power. This is just Trump wiping his ass with the constitution again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol and Delmar
#12
#12
USF grad in TN said:
I agree that it's a normal example of Trump running his mouth like when he said he would invade Greenland.
He has no right to federalize elections, but Congress can set standardized rules.

Hat tip to @Orange_Crush.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S4-C1-3/ALDE_00013640/
The [Elections] Clause is a default provision; it invests the States with responsibility for the mechanics of congressional elections but only so far as Congress declines to pre-empt state legislative choices. Thus, it is well settled that the Elections Clause grants Congress ‘the power to override state regulations’ by establishing uniform rules for federal elections, binding on the States. ‘The regulations made by Congress are paramount to those made by the State legislature; and if they conflict therewith, the latter so far as the conflict extends, ceases to be operative.'16
Click to expand...
The latter would fall under my "serious changes" caveat. Possible? It appears there is a lever to be pulled but the blowback could be massive.
 
#13
#13
Trump is old and doesn't care about the future when the Dems are in power next and control the elections nationwide, lol. I'm sure that will go over well.
 
#15
#15
If Trump has been effective at anything, it's consolidating power to the feds. This is his legacy.....aside from being a pedo protecting authoritarian who shidded himself in the oval office in front of America.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol and TN Ribs
#20
#20
hndog609 said:
Sounds like just more Trump babel. Even without reading the link just from the blurb how do you "nationalize" voting in 15 states? You either nationalize Federal elections or you don't.

In any case once the babbling is set aside I don't see any way to have that actually happen legally without some serious changes.
Click to expand...
Babble is a good word to use. Personally I think he is getting more unstable by the day. Throwing more 💩 against the wall daily on numerous topics and I think Americans on both sides are starting to notice the insanity and the increased pettiness. I would say that he will need to be replaced but then we get Vance and that could be an utter disaster.
🤦🤷‍♂️
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#21
#21
n_huffhines said:
If Trump has been effective at anything, it's consolidating power to the feds. This is his legacy.....aside from being a pedo protecting authoritarian who shidded himself in the oval office in front of America.
Click to expand...

Where is the pants shidding coming from? I've seen references to that a lot lately. I mean, I don't doubt it really but that seems to have gotten a lot of traction as of late.
 
#23
#23
MercyPercy said:
Where is the pants shidding coming from? I've seen references to that a lot lately. I mean, I don't doubt it really but that seems to have gotten a lot of traction as of late.
Click to expand...

He may or may not have dumped himself during a presser in tge oval office a few days ago.

You can audibly hear a fart, but the real meat of the clip are the reactions of the two sycophants behind him.

I got a good chuckle out of it.

"Defecon 1"
"Shart of the deal"
"THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS SPLATTER"
"there will immediately be a congressional hearing so Hillary can confess as to how Biden crapped in Donald's diaper"
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
#24
#24
MercyPercy said:
Trump is old and doesn't care about the future when the Dems are in power next and control the elections nationwide, lol. I'm sure that will go over well.
Click to expand...
Is Trump promoting Congress doing something that Congress does not already have the constitutional right to do? Or hasn't done in the past? I'm not sure how passing legislation about federal elections will give future Congresses more power. Can you please explain your slippery slope fallacy?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TOUCHDOWN!!TN, W.TN.Orange Blood, whodeycin85 and 1 other person
#25
#25
Good Ol' Charlie Brown said:
Spoken like someone who doesn't care enough about America to vote
Click to expand...

Spoken like someone who didn't get the point.

I voted Chase Oliver because I care a lot. But if there isn't someone to cast a symbolic vote to, I am not voting in support of people I know are going to use the force of the government to push their bad ideas on America....because I care a lot.

A monkey can cast a vote, and might do a better job than Americans, but people act like it's their golden ticket to civic achievement. You're just voting to force BS on others. Way to go.

You can vote for both parties to grow ICE, subvert the bill of rights, fund genocide in Gaza, etc. but morally I cannot justify any of that stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: purp, EasternVol and NashVol11
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top