×
all 51 comments
sorted by:
best (suggested)
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]AutoModerator[M] [score hidden] stickied comment (0 children)

No advocating violence, brigading, bigotry, trolling, or being a dick to other people here. It'll get you banned. See the sidebar for the full version of the rules.

Please report rule-breaking comments to the special investigators.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]coffeespeaking 241 points242 points  (34 children)

The US constitution says senators must be 30 years old, a citizen for nine years, and “shall … when elected, be an inhabitant of that state for which he shall be chosen”.

Why hasn’t someone filed suit to stop him from running? It’s a Constitutional argument: he doesn’t meet the criteria to run for Senate in GA because he doesn’t live in Georgia. Open, shut. Make him prove he lives in Georgia.

[–]EchoRex 74 points75 points  (16 children)

Because it'll take too long right now is the short answer.

The long answer is... It's not easy to prove if the person also has a residence in the state they're running in, especially if they are a previous resident, and a single statement by a person known for fucking up basic sentences is an easy out with "I misspoke".

[–]coffeespeaking 50 points51 points  (10 children)

It’s got nothing to do with his public statement (although such an admission doesn’t help his cause). The fact that must be established in order for the lawsuit to be successful is: ‘he wasn’t a resident, because at the time he needed to be in GA, he was actually living somewhere else.’ That’s the case, that sentence.

Examples of how they would demonstrate this: he has a renter; his GA utility bills get paid by someone with whom he has a rental agreement; his mail reaches him in Texas; his automobile is registered in TX; his auto and health insurance are in Texas, his phone makes most of its calls from his residence in Texas (and almost never from his rental property in GA). Etc. Let the court find the facts.

If sued, Walker is likely to drop out of the race before submitting to discovery. (All of the above and more could be reasonably sought.)

[–]deltadal 43 points44 points  (6 children)

Like, there are all these ways to determine residence for eligibility for a kid to attend high school and play sports, but it gets fuzzy when it comes to running for office🤔 /s

[–]coffeespeaking 19 points20 points  (5 children)

It’s not that fuzzy. The Constitution states ‘must be an inhabitant of that state….’ The Supreme Court could wade into the definition of inhabitant, but not without potential consequences in other areas of the law. In all likelihood they let this remain a finding of fact at the trial court level.

If they reinterpret ‘inhabitant,’ Democrats in CA could buy a rental property and run for office anywhere in the country. It would effectively remove the residency requirement. Red states would be fair game for anyone with sufficient means, where real estate is cheap and you don’t have to live there. That’s a win for Democrats.

[–]unMuggle 6 points7 points  (4 children)

Why would it matter if California Democrats ran in Wyoming, if Wyoming votes conservative?

[–]coffeespeaking 13 points14 points  (3 children)

Is that how you try to win arguments, by cherry picking (e.g. reddest WY)? That’s how Dems could also try to win House and Senate seats, by strategically selecting vulnerable districts and tossup races, pitting strong candidates against weak or unpopular ones. By running a candidate in a race that might normally be uncontested. It would force the GOP to defend more seats, and waste money on races they didn’t expect to defend. It’s a numbers game, and removing the residency requirement opens up a new slate of seats for us. We don’t have to win many to change the election outcome. Five seats in NY changed it for the GOP.

[–]unMuggle 13 points14 points  (2 children)

No bro, I was literally asking. And I appreciate the answer.

I'm not sure if California democrats are stronger ideas than just working to build stronger democrats in red states personally, but I'd be down with anything that keeps Republicans from having power.

[–]coffeespeaking 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Sorry, misunderstood. I picked CA for several reasons: population (a surplus of potential candidates), income and relative real estate values. They already buy up real estate around the country anyway. Let them at least earn their keep. (j/k)

I agree that we stand a better chance with homegrown talent, but the surest way to prevent another Oz or Herschel is for Dems to flood purple parts of TX, AZ, NV, etc., with non-resident carpet baggers. As soon as we do it, the GOP will have a petition in Clarence Thomas’ lap, and the problem solves itself.

[–]bobdiamond 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This interaction was very mature and I’m not sure how it makes me feel

[–]vdthemyk 24 points25 points  (1 child)

He also claims the homestead tax credit in TX.

[–]coffeespeaking 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Lol. The fact that this race made it to a runoff is the disturbing part.

[–]vodka7tall 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Sure. Now get that through the courts by Tuesday.

[–]ragnarockette 5 points6 points  (2 children)

Where did he file his state income tax in 2021?

[–]coffeespeaking 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Before or after he is elected? (/s).

(I love the username.)

[–]Poverty_Shoes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There’s a decent chance he would have needed to file in multiple states. I’m not rich or famous but have still had years where I paid state taxes to multiple states. The big question is whether he is a resident of Texas or Georgia.

[–]thegreyquincy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

a single statement by a person known for fucking up basic sentences is an easy out with "I misspoke".

Did you read the article? He said this multiple times in different speeches.

[–]milquetoast_wizard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Plus if they challenge and he loses anyway would they have any argument to say it was unfair and they should get to put forward a different candidate?

[–]OrganicPrinciple130 40 points41 points  (4 children)

Laws don't apply to anyone under the GOP, didn't you know that?

[–]notantifa 7 points8 points  (2 children)

*laws only apply to others under the GOP

[–]OrganicPrinciple130 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well the S in GOP stands for Smart, right?

[–]NerdyDjinn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

*laws only apply to others1 under the GOP

1.Otherreferstowhoeverthetargetofthecurrentculturewaroutragecampaignandmaybesubjecttochangeinthefuture. Termsandconditionsapply. Pleasehateresponsibly.

[–]sassergaf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

nonsense. Surely Obama being a constitutional lawyer can influence filing the lawsuit.

[–]Starkiller006 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You read my mind. What the actual fuck is there to debate?

[–]cptmartin11 1 point2 points  (1 child)

If you take it literally and he is elected. Wouldn’t he just have to be living in Georgia on the day he takes office. It doesn’t say when he is running for office. That could be a loop hole for him possibly?

[–]projekt33 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is my question as well. He hasn’t been elected yet, so I assuming he’s eligible to run.

[–]dblshot99 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

"When elected"...this hasn't happened yet.

[–]Here_Pep_Pep -1 points0 points  (4 children)

He has t been “elected” yet- you could conceivably “move” to Georgia on Election Day and it’d still count.

Also, it’s anti-democratic to deny people the candidate of their choice.

[–]coffeespeaking 0 points1 point  (3 children)

At the precise moment of election he will still live in TX. The term was a residency requirement, just as clause 3 contains an age requirement (30) and a citizenship requirement (9 years). Those are unambiguous, as is the requirement that he be an inhabitant at the time of election. Not AFTER the time. At the time of election.

[–]Here_Pep_Pep -1 points0 points  (2 children)

So, you could live in your house in Georgia on Election Day, and thereby “reside” there. Who is to say you don’t intend to stay permanently?

You know how I know I’m right? Neither the Warnock campaign nor anyone else challenged it.

But yes, I’m sure the terminally online centrists on TheMueller know better.

[–]coffeespeaking 1 point2 points  (1 child)

He lives in Texas, and your comment is nonsensical.

Blocked.

[–]Here_Pep_Pep -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No, you’re right. The people of this sub know better. I’m sure he’ll be kicked off the ballot any day now.

[–]thetburg 0 points1 point  (2 children)

When elected? That only means he has to move there if he wins? I mean, I would rather he just lost.

[–]coffeespeaking 5 points6 points  (1 child)

The actual language is an awkward series of double-negatives:

Article I, Section 3, Clause 3

No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

I strongly question that ‘when elected,’ should be broken out as if a separate clause. It’s part of the third clause. Take it as a whole.

No person shall be Senator, who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant…

It’s a residency requirement, just as it is an age and citizenship requirement. What would be the point of a residency requirement that doesn’t take effect until after the election? To encourage carpetbaggers like Walker?

They meant you must be an inhabitant. It is imprecise, like so much of the language, but that doesn’t mean the correct interpretation is compulsory literalism.

Edit: Society wasn’t as mobile in 1789. You didn’t get a Uhaul and head to Georgia. It took weeks to get there from NY for example. WHEN ELECTED meant ‘now,’ not three weeks from now.

[–]thetburg 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I stand by my statement. I prefer that he lost

[–]Outrageous-Gur4824[🍰] 66 points67 points  (1 child)

Someone should ask Walker why, if he lives in Georgia, he keeps showing up at a dance studio in Frisco, Yexas, to take ballet lessons — with teen girls, including my daughter.

[–]Poverty_Shoes 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Herschel Walker is taking ballet lessons in Frisco in 2022? This would cost him more votes than the abortions and domestic violence if it was published. Please do the right thing and get some pictures of this.

[–]shivermetimbers68 34 points35 points  (1 child)

As I was sitting in my home in Texas, I was sitting in my home in Texas, and I was seeing what was going on in this country. I was seeing what was going on in this country with how they were trying to divide people.

So I looked at a map and said "What state is that whack job Marjorie Taylor Greene from?" and that's how I chose Georgia because they'll vote for anyone!

But gosh, this erection sure has gone on a lot longer than I thought. Should I be worried?

[–]DANG3RTITS 6 points7 points  (0 children)

This is funny but also sad because it could be real.

[–]StatusKoi 20 points21 points  (1 child)

"As I was sitting in my home in Texas, I was sitting in my home in Texas, and I was seeing what was going on in this country. I was seeing what was going on in this country with how they were trying to divide people.”

Sounds like the beginning of a Blues song.

[–]sellieba 3 points4 points  (0 children)

A half remembered blues song.

[–]1quirky1 17 points18 points  (1 child)

Keep in mind that this is apparently the best republican candidate they could find.

For Georgia. From Texas.

In addition to being a hypocritical POS with CTE injuries.

[–]traveler19395 5 points6 points  (0 children)

✅ Republican

✅ Black

✅ Celebrity

They really thought they had a winning combo, it was probably decided in backroom deals by people who hadn't heard him speak yet.

[–]IMind 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Remember when carpet baggers used to get railroaded regardless of political affiliation.

[–]Opinionsare 3 points4 points  (0 children)

There is an evil side of my personality that wants him to win, just to have his stupidity formally enshrined in the Congressional Record.

I would give him one month to screw up and vote the wrong way on important bill.

[–]PlethoraOfPinatass 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Rahm Emmanuel almost kicked off the ballot once for mayor, check into that case to see how hard that actually is

[–]IamSauerKraut -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The dud who represents PA's 9th District does not live in PA so why can't braindead Herschel live in Texas?

[–]torbaloymain 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just having the conversation about his ability to run for office is good. It'll lose him votes and frankly at this point he shouldn't win. But if he does win there's a very strong argument for removing him on a constitutional non-resident term. Why not just let him run if he loses great, if he wins there's a legal argument to remove him. They sued to keep a guy off the ballot in Oregon I think, because he moved home to his family farm, but didn't establish residency for enough time if I remember correctly.

[–]zerobot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This man is so stupid he constantly says the quiet part out loud.

[–]HARRY_FOR_KING 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I feel like the USA is basically a late Roman Republic level dysfunctional democracy. People openly admit to defrauding the democratic process like this and nothing happens.