Yes thats what we are currently discussing. They done the paperwork, they got the signatures.
But uh oh democrats decided those signatures arent allowed, in a challenge brought upon by democrats to a democrat controlled supreme court.
Just a reminder you are arguing against letting a political party participate in an election. The gravity of that is immense to me, i think it would be to you too if you were seeing it from an outside perspective. Like we see Russia banning candidates.
The exact same thing that happened in Pennsylvania. A state body ruling that some signatures werent allowed, so the candidate is barred from participating in the election.
Yes thats what we are currently discussing. They done the paperwork, they got the signatures.
But uh oh democrats decided those signatures arent allowed, in a challenge brought upon by democrats to a democrat controlled supreme court.
Just a reminder you are arguing against letting a political party participate in an election. The gravity of that is immense to me, i think it would be to you too if you were seeing it from an outside perspective. Like we see Russia banning candidates.
Actually this is what I’m arguing.
It’s a couple comments up if you’d like to see yourself.
Yes they did. They jumped through all the hoops and got all the electors they needed.
Not according to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
Right, same as in Russia. Its obvious BS
I don’t think Russia has a Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
A state body regulating elections. it was even a ruling that decided some signatures werent allowed.
Can you try this comment again because I’m not picking up what you’re putting down.
The exact same thing that happened in Pennsylvania. A state body ruling that some signatures werent allowed, so the candidate is barred from participating in the election.