The senator, who ran for the Republican nomination for president last year, repeatedly refused to say whether he’d accept this year’s presidential election results, regardless of who wins.
Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina on Sunday did not directly answer multiple questions about whether he’d accept the results of the 2024 presidential election, regardless of who wins.
“At the end of the day, the 47th president of the United States will be President Donald Trump,” Scott, a Republican, said the first time he was directly asked whether he would commit to accepting the election results on NBC News’ “Meet the Press.”
Asked again by moderator Kristen Welker to answer “yes or no?” to the original question, Scott simply said, “That is my statement.”
Pressed a third time to answer the question, Scott said, “I look forward to President Trump being the 47th president — the American people will make the decision.”
Earlier this month, Trump himself told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that he would accept the results of the presidential election in Wisconsin only “if everything’s honest.”
I think any candidate that doesn’t subscribe to an elections outcome, so long as the election has a prescribed method for a redress of grievances, is automatically disqualified from being considered in said election.
Its an assumption the system makes: If you are participating in an election, you also agree that 1) an election is happening and you support that, and 2) that you will abide by its outcomes.
I don’t see how you can in good faith be participating in an election and unwilling to accept its outcome. The assumption that you will abide by its outcomes seems baked into the cake.
If someone goes on a national news program and can not say that they’ll accept election results, that should be the end of their time on that news program.
I mean I wouldn’t say that. I’m not pro-censorship, even when its views I find abhorrent. But I think when you apply to be on a ballot and sign your name on that dotted line, you’ve made a contract to agree to the outcomes of that election. In denying that outcome in advance of the election, you’ve broken the terms of the contract, and should not be on the ballot.
Let me know when I get my time at the Supreme Court.
Not inviting someone on your news program is not censorship. No one has a right to be on the news.
Thats the thing, Trump and the MAGAts aren’t participating in good faith.
Oh 100%.
I’m making a kind of philosophical argument that voice that you won’t accept an elections outcome if you aren’t declared the winner, that should be considered an automatic disqualification.
I realize our political system is too weak, and our politicians too meandering for an argument like that to ever go anywhere.