Viewing last 25 versions of post by Ciaran in topic Don't blame me, I voted for the other guy. (Politics General)

[@Natry](/forums/generals/topics/tartarus?post_id=5560573#post_5560573)
State primaries are not about federal laws.

And this Colorado Supreme Court ruling has its own weirdness to it, although at this point it is moot.

For example, state parties can put anyone it wants on its primary ballot. So it shouldn't even have been at their state Supreme Court.

And the 14th forbids anyone who "engaged in insurrection" from **holding** office - not running for it. So how is it being used by a state's Supreme Court from keeping him off of a party's preference primary?

None of this makes any sense.

It is still hilarious.

But none of it makes any sense at all.

Update: Ah. It is because the [Colorado Election Code forbids someone who is ineligible for an office from being listed as a candidate for the office.](https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/Supreme_Court/Opinions/2023/23SA300.pdf) That's why their Supreme Court had a foot in the ring.

[@Natry](/forums/generals/topics/tartarus?post_id=5560573#post_5560573)
State primaries are not about federal laws.

And this Colorado Supreme Court ruling has its own weirdness to it, although at this point it is moot.

For example, state parties can put anyone it wants on its primary ballot. So it shouldn't even have been at their state Supreme Court.

And the 14th forbids anyone who "engaged in insurrection" from **holding** office - not running for it. So how is it being used by a state's Supreme Court from keeping him off of a party's preference primary?

None of this makes any sense.

It is still hilarious.

But none of it makes any sense at all.

Update: Ah. It is because the [Colorado Election Code forbids someone who is ineligible for an office from being listed as a candidate.](https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/Supreme_Court/Opinions/2023/23SA300.pdf) That's why their Supreme Court had a foot in the ring.

[@Natry](/forums/generals/topics/tartarus?post_id=5560573#post_5560573)
State primaries are not about federal laws.

And this Colorado Supreme Court ruling has its own weirdness to it, although at this point it is moot.

For example, state parties can put anyone it wants on its primary ballot. So it shouldn't even have been at their state Supreme Court.

And the 14th forbids anyone who "engaged in insurrection" from **holding** office - not running for it. So how is it being used by a state's Supreme Court from keeping him off of a party's preference primary?

None of this makes any sense.

It is still hilarious.

But none of it makes any sense at all.

Update: Ah. It is because the [Colorado Election Code forbids someone who is ineligible from being listed as a candidate.](https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/Supreme_Court/Opinions/2023/23SA300.pdf) That's why their Supreme Court had a foot in the ring.