• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Barr files suit in TX to remove Obama and McCain

Barr was an embarrassment during the Clinton impeachment proceedings and now he's at it again. Why won't he go quietly into the night?
 
More Power to him !
I hope he wins!

But either way this will show the American People how corrupt the
REP&DEM parties are ! And it's my hope that soon the Masses
will open their eyes and realize that they a supporting a corrupt system
that is harming them DIRECTLY and Killing America.....
 
Obama should push for this. Losing Texas doesn't affect him one bit. Can't say the same for McCain.
 
What comes around goes around huh?
If they can say that Barr shouldn't be on the ballot in PA then the same would be said for McCain and Obama in TX, or hell any state for that matter.
The point is legitimate but no one should be banned from ballots, this is but how the two parties have been squeezing out the competition and we're left between the lesser of two evils.
 
I hope he wins this. . . Texans need to be held accountable for their own stupidity. Only morons could have a requirement to file prior to the candidates completing their party's nominating process.
 
Sadly, he doesn't have a chance. There is no way in hell that the Republicans are going to let this stand. No chance. Could you imagine the damage that would cause to their chances of winning the White House?

The US government wouldn't let this happen either. They are so goddamn corrupt that they will do ANYTHING to keep their buddies in power. They are just pissed that they have to share it with somebody else, they definitely aren't going to share with TWO other people.

Its bull****, but there it is just the same. I agree with Barr 100% on this singular issue.
 
This is great and I hope it stands up in a court of law, if this is truly the law in TX.

Tear down the duopoly!
 
The best thing that can come out of this is the courts ruling that Obama and McCain must be on the ballot in Texas, and that Barr must be on the ballot in Pennsylvania, since the circumstances are identical.
 
danarhea said:
The best thing that can come out of this is the courts ruling that Obama and McCain must be on the ballot in Texas, and that Barr must be on the ballot in Pennsylvania, since the circumstances are identical.
Click to expand...

I think you are confusing state laws with national ones. Ballot access is a state issue, not a national issue. There is no compromise--each case is a separate issue.

Texas can rule this anyway it likes without having to subject Penn to its decisions.
 
chevydriver1123 said:
Just like the state GOP tried to do to Barr in PA, Barr plans to do the same thing to Obama and McCain.

Bob Barr Files Suit in Texas to Remove McCain, Obama from Ballot — Bob Barr 2008
Click to expand...

Seems like a valid dispute.
Obama bumped both the Democrat and the Republican off the ballot in one of his state elections due to a similar legal technicality.

The law is the law.
This could be tricky though. McCain can not win without Texas as things are.
But if Obama is perceived to be behind this and it gets really nasty, things will not be as they are now.

Another thing to consider is that Bush has the Supreme Court in his pocket.
They voted agaisnt a recount that was almost certain to show the Democrat as the winner.
I would imagine Republicans control a lot of the courts in Tx.
And the Republicans have been only hiring Republicans in the legal system for some time now.
And fired how many democratic Attorney Generals?

Just like there should at least be a fair hearing or fair trial for Bush, this is something that will just be swept aside.

How far would this go btw?
Can a State Law issue even go beyond the State Courts?
 
Last edited:
It's really not the fault of either party that they couldn't finish their primaries in time- blame it on Clinton and Huckabee. Barr should be on every state's ballot, but so should the two major candidates.
 
Edify_Always_In_All_Ways said:
It's really not the fault of either party that they couldn't finish their primaries in time- blame it on Clinton and Huckabee. Barr should be on every state's ballot, but so should the two major candidates.
Click to expand...

I do agree in principle.
But the Law is also the Law.

At the very least, there should be a hearing with a decision to eliminate the Law.
But so long as it exists, I do not see any way they can get around it without yet another incident of Politicans being Immune to the Law.
 
Edify_Always_In_All_Ways said:
It's really not the fault of either party that they couldn't finish their primaries in time- blame it on Clinton and Huckabee. Barr should be on every state's ballot, but so should the two major candidates.
Click to expand...

Then people need to start voting for the Barr or Nader (or 3rd party) in order to reach "the 5% threshold" that guarantees access to federal funding along with guaranteeing ballot access on many states (not all) without having to jump through loopholes of gathering signatures.

The LP is still fighting MA, ME, OK in court over ballot access. It ties up a lot useful energy and diverts it elsewhere. Ballot Access | Libertarian Party

If any party knows the state laws of securing ballot access, then that would be 3rd parties candidates. I am truly curious how this issue with TX will turn out.
 
Last edited:
It seems something is wrong with the way those laws are written. If the conventions are closer than the deadlines what are the candidates to do? I expect the state judges to put them on the ballots.

I see Barr's issue in Pa has some political issues. Texas should be more clear cut, if they use common sense.

Should be interesting. :2wave:
 
ADK_Forever said:
It seems something is wrong with the way those laws are written. If the conventions are closer than the deadlines what are the candidates to do? I expect the state judges to put them on the ballots.

I see Barr's issue in Pa has some political issues. Texas should be more clear cut, if they use common sense.

Should be interesting. :2wave:
Click to expand...

I agree it is common sense.

But at which point does common sense over ride the Law?
And who determines which sense in common enough to over ride the Law?

Marijuana should be legal. That's common sense because an over whelming % of people that have actually "tried" it say so.
But the Law is all that matters.
At which point do we ignore the Law for the sake of common sense?
 
John1234,

I definitely see your points, especially about the pot! ;)

But, what would it say about our country if while having a Presidential election, the candidates for the 2 major parties were not on a state ballot?

This is the problem I have with the yahoos who actually make our laws! Most of them are so worried about taking care of their little piece of turf, their lobbyist "friends" and cheating fairness in the name of partisan gamesmanship that they screw up the effectiveness of the laws.

Maybe our laws should be made by computers? Imagine what hackers could do then! :cool:
 
ADK_Forever said:
John1234,

I definitely see your points, especially about the pot! ;)

But, what would it say about our country if while having a Presidential election, the candidates for the 2 major parties were not on a state ballot?

This is the problem I have with the yahoos who actually make our laws! Most of them are so worried about taking care of their little piece of turf, their lobbyist "friends" and cheating fairness in the name of partisan gamesmanship that they screw up the effectiveness of the laws.

Maybe our laws should be made by computers? Imagine what hackers could do then! :cool:
Click to expand...

What does it day about a country founded on the rule of law that no longer follows the rule of law?
 
Voluntary said:
I think you are confusing state laws with national ones. Ballot access is a state issue, not a national issue. There is no compromise--each case is a separate issue.

Texas can rule this anyway it likes without having to subject Penn to its decisions.
Click to expand...

When voting for national candidates, it IS a national issue.
 
ARealConservative said:
What does it day about a country founded on the rule of law that no longer follows the rule of law?
Click to expand...

Ahhh... you have hit the nail smack on the head!!!

As law abiding citizens we wish to follow our laws.

Our lawmakers make bad or stupid laws, or the laws have unintended wrong consequences.

Our lawmakers should fix the bad laws.

But, for whatever reason, they don't.

Agggghhhhh!!!! :rwbdonkey:blastem::rwbelepha:blastem:
 
John1234 said:
Can a State Law issue even go beyond the State Courts?
Click to expand...

Yes, it can. But the litmus for it would be if the law in question is in contravention of the US Constitution.

I don't see how that could possibly be the case here. The Texas law allows for equal access to being placed on the ballot provided the guidelines are met. Nobody's rights are prejudiced in the application of the standards.

The only way this becomes a federal courts issue is if the 5th Circuit or the SCOTUS decides that there is something unconstitutional about the law.

Barr looks to be on solid legal ground here. If this gains traction, it's a game-changer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom