I'm putting this up early since it's likely I won't have time tomorrow.
Monday, 1/15, is the date of the Iowa Caucus, please direct all comments, links, and replies involving that here!
Edit - 5:36 PM Pacific, 7:36 PM Iowa time, 8:36 PM Eastern - MSNBC declares Trump the winner (shock!)
8:23 PM Pacific, 10:23 PM Iowa time, 11:23 PM Eastern. MSNBC declares Desantis #2, Haley #3.
Final Results:
Iowa had 40 delegates to assign out for the convention. A candidate needs 1,215 delegates to become the official nominee.
Donald Trump - 51% - 56,260 votes - 20 delegates
Ron DeSantis - 21.2% - 23,420 votes - 9 delegates
Nikki Haley - 19.1% - 21,085 votes - 8 delegates
Vivek Ramaswamy - 7.7% - 8,449 votes - 3 delegates
Ryan Binkley - 0.7% - 774 votes
Asa Hutchinson - 0.2% - 191 votes
Chris Christie - <0.1% - 35 votes
Other candidates - <0.1% - 84 votes
Edit Next Up - 1/23 - New Hampshire Primary!
For those unaware, a caucus is totally unlike a primary.
In a primary election, you show up to a polling place, you cast your ballot for your chosen candidate, the ballots get counted, and whoever wins is whoever wins. On to the next state!
A caucus is far, far more chaotic.
"The Republican caucuses will convene statewide at 7 p.m. local time (8 p.m. EST), and begin with the election of a caucus chair and secretary. Only registered Republicans may participate in the caucuses and only in their designated home precincts. However, Iowans may register or change their party affiliation on caucus day. Voters must turn 18 by the November general election in order to participate."
"There is no walking around the caucus room to form candidate preference groups. That voting method was a feature of Democratic caucuses from 1972 to 2020 but is no longer in use by either party in 2024."
"The binding presidential vote functions essentially like a party-run primary, only with very limited polling hours and no accommodation for absentee voting, except for a tiny handful of overseas and military voters. There are speeches on behalf of various candidates before the voting and a variety of party business after the vote. Individual caucus chairs are allowed to exercise some discretion in how to conduct the vote, but the voting is done by secret ballot and there is no set list of candidates. Voters must be given the option to vote for any candidate they choose. In the past, some caucus sites have pre-printed the names of major candidates and provided a write-in option, but typically, voters vote by writing the name of a candidate on a blank slip of paper."
The "limited polling hours" is key here, because if you decide to step out for a smoke, or to hit the bathroom, or grab a sandwich when the vote is called, you might not get counted at all.
In previous years this has led to accusations of under-counts, over-counts, and all other manner of shenanigans.
Here's the history of the past few Iowa Caucuses and how it related to the general election:
2016:
Ted Cruz - 8 Delegates, 51,666 votes
Donald Trump - 7 / 45,429
Marco Rubio - 7 / 43,228
Ben Carson - 3 / 17,394
Rand Paul - 1 / 8,481
Jeb Bush - 1 / 5,238
Carly Fiorina - 1 / 3,485
John Kasich - 1 / 3,474
Mike Huckabee - 1 / 3,345
2020:
Donald Trump - 39 Delegates, 31,421 votes
Bill Weld - 1 / 425
Sources:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Iowa_Republican_presidential_caucuses
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Iowa_Republican_presidential_caucuses
General Elections:
2016:
Trump/Pence - 800,983
Clinton/Kaine - 653,669
2020:
Trump/Pence - 897,672
Biden/Harris - 759,061
Sources:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election_in_Iowa
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election_in_Iowa
well, since it's gone to SCOTUS, don't expect much movement until they make a ruling. Honestly, i expect them to realize that the only thing they can do is say, "it's a state issue," and kick it back down to the states to decide who gets on what ballot.
the only thing they might dip their toe in on is what is or is not "insurrection", although i rather doubt it because i don't know whether that's actually an issue being challenged.
I don't think they're going to rule on Trump and insurrection at all because that's the subject of a criminal case.
There's no way they're going to put the thumb on the scale and determine guilt or innocence in a case that hasn't even happened yet.
Saying "Yes, Trump is an insurrectionist, remove him from the ballot" or "No, it's fine, he can stay." would do exactly that.
well, it’s 2 issues there, really— 1) whether a state can remove Trump (or anyone) from a ballot (or maybe just a primary ballot) and 2) whether Trump committed insurrection (an issue which may preclude the other issue). They may decide to rule on issue 1 and ignore issue 2 for the reason you mentioned, or they may (more likely) decide to say that issue 1 is a state issue (which it is) and ignore issue 2 altogether as, like you said, it’s an ongoing matter in lower courts.
They literally cannot kick it back to states. It would mean anyone could file civil lawsuit in any state and it would be arbitrary up to whatever judge to bar federal candidate from the ballot. Then it might go to judgment call by a state Supreme Court (with or without appeals courts) and/or a secretary of state.
If SCOTUS kicked it back to states it's already been declared that about 30 states will immediately remove Biden from the ballot.
Biden's not in violation of the 14th Amendment. There's no basis to remove him.
But also, largely, in this case, we're talking about a primary ballot and Biden isn't even on all of them in the first place. See New Hampshire.
If SCOTUS leaves it up to states, and leaves it self executing for 14th. It means anyone can file civil action.
You might think Biden is not in violation of 14th, but many Republican secretary of states DO think so. It's very vague just like used in CO, "given aid or comfort to the enemies" will be up to courts to interpret.
The big argument they are making for Biden and the 14th is failing to secure the border, the problem with that argument is that the people gathering at the border are not enemies and the countries they come from are not enemies.
this won't happen because there would need to be cause, which there isn’t. Trump wasn’t just arbitrarily removed from the ballot in CO and ME. He was legally disqualified for violating the 14th Amendment. So, unless Biden also did that, is under 43 years old, or was born in another country, there’s no legal basis to remove him from any ballot or disqualify him from the office of President.
of course they can by saying that the state’s ruling stands because it’s up to the states to run their own elections, which it is.
Do you know what SCOTUS even if? No states cannot interpret 14th Amendment because it's "their" election. SCOTUS has final say.
And there are many arguments against Biden giving aide to the enemy, which if you are paying attention to the Republicans have listed their many arguments they will use in court. I suggest you read their articles of impeachment as a starting point.
It’s funny, you mention that, because they’ve been trying that shit for a year in Congress, and it’s gotten absolutely nowhere. But go on like it’s actually something that might happen.  There has to actually be a crime, and proof that that happened. Since there isn’t either…