Both sides absolutely do make those claims - I have seen it as well. However, only one candidate suggested parts of the Constitution be terminated. Only one candidate engaged in a plot to subvert the certification of a presidential election in an attempt to remain in power. Given the importance of the Constitution, I find that candidate'…
Both sides absolutely do make those claims - I have seen it as well. However, only one candidate suggested parts of the Constitution be terminated. Only one candidate engaged in a plot to subvert the certification of a presidential election in an attempt to remain in power. Given the importance of the Constitution, I find that candidate's complete disregard for it to be disqualifying on a foundational level. I suppose that since both candidates are on the ballot they both "technically" qualify. That is where my initial assertion is rooted, though.
Both sides absolutely do make those claims - I have seen it as well. However, only one candidate suggested parts of the Constitution be terminated. Only one candidate engaged in a plot to subvert the certification of a presidential election in an attempt to remain in power. Given the importance of the Constitution, I find that candidate's complete disregard for it to be disqualifying on a foundational level. I suppose that since both candidates are on the ballot they both "technically" qualify. That is where my initial assertion is rooted, though.
I think we have the same standards of "qualifications." ;)
I am glad to hear it!