General Discussion

skip fox

(19,502 posts)

7. I'd say that anyone who doesn't want to play the game of democracy shouldn't be on the ballot.

Tue Jan 31, 2023, 03:18 PM

Jan 2023

"Playing the game" of democracy includes accepting the results. (At least after court challenges.)

Would a casino let someone play roulette if they state they'll take their chips if they don't win?

In any other contest would we let someone enter who states they won't abide by the rules of the contest?

In fact they aren't even wiling to "play the game," so why let them?

Do we need laws for this? Why not make it a condition for being on the ballot?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Is it time for states to make laws against "election deniers" when elections have been certified as [View all] Samrob Jan 2023 OP

It would never fly... Ohio Joe Jan 2023 #1

NO!!! MarineCombatEngineer Jan 2023 #2

My gut reaction is to say "NO" MissMillie Jan 2023 #3

When speech leads to death or denial of other rights? nt Samrob Jan 2023 #4

I get the incitement argument MissMillie Jan 2023 #6

One step closer... sarisataka Jan 2023 #5

I'd say that anyone who doesn't want to play the game of democracy shouldn't be on the ballot. skip fox Jan 2023 #7

I can agree to that. But what if they aren't running for office? No consequence? nt Samrob Jan 2023 #9

It all makes sense until we're the ones questioning the fairness-think Florida 2000. jalan48 Jan 2023 #8

That would backfire fescuerescue Jan 2023 #10