Post

Roborian wrote:

You just gotta love the reasoning behind the second choice (which apparently is the most popular one), "Trump did untold damage to our democracy, so we must therefore in response make it illegal for the people to choose their preferred leader via vote."

'We must protect our democracy by destroying our democracy.'

That seems specious and hyperbolic. The Founders didn't see a problem with holding votes to disqualify officials (incumbent or former) from holding office after an extremely bad event/behavior. As the impeachment managers demonstrated with the Belknap case, the Founders did intend to use the clause in that way. Since it was written into the Constitution itself, it seems that you have a problem with the Founders having this provision to begin with.