Saltar al contenido

Donald Trump Gets Big Win In New Hampshire

Donald Trump Gets Big Win In New HampshireDonald Trump Gets Big Win In New Hampshire" title="Donald Trump Gets Big Win In New Hampshire" onerror="this.src=''; jQuery(this).removeAttr('srcset');"/>

Title: Donald Trump’s Victory in New Hampshire: Battle for Ballot Access


Donald Trump, the former President of the United States, recently found himself embroiled in a controversy regarding his potential removal from the ballot in New Hampshire’s Republican Primary. New Hampshire Secretary of State, David Scanlan, openly flirted with the idea of using the Fourteenth Amendment to exclude Trump from the ballots. However, after facing public pressure, Scanlan clarified that he is not seeking to remove any names from the ballot. This article will delve into the details of this incident, exploring the motivations and implications behind the controversy.

The Threat to Remove Donald Trump from the Ballot

According to a report by Breitbart, Secretary of State David Scanlan considered invoking the Fourteenth Amendment to keep Donald Trump off the Republican primary ballot in New Hampshire. Turning Point USA Founder Charlie Kirk urged his supporters to call Scanlan’s office, which led to increased pressure on the Secretary of State’s stance. Scanlan’s discussion with New Hampshire attorney Bryant “Corky” Messner about Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment sparked concerns about Trump’s eligibility to hold office. The section states that public officials engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States are not eligible to hold office.

Scanlan’s Deliberation and the Decision-Making Process

In an interview with the Boston Globe, Scanlan admitted that he pondered the possibility of keeping Trump off the ballot. As someone lacking legal expertise, he sought opinions from in-house staff attorneys and planned to consult the attorney general’s office for further input. Scanlan acknowledged the need for judicial involvement in the decision-making process, highlighting the importance of legal considerations before arriving at a final verdict.

Consultation with New Hampshire GOP Chairman Chris Agers

Charlie Kirk, in pursuit of clarity on this matter, spoke to Chris Agers, Chairman of the New Hampshire GOP. Agers unequivocally asserted that efforts to deny New Hampshire Republican primary voters a full slate of options were contrary to the state’s “live free or die” spirit. Agers expressed his confidence in the secretary of state and the attorney general to make the right decisions, emphasizing the significance of allowing voters to choose the nominee rather than subjecting the process to a weaponized federal justice system using convoluted legal logic.

A Defiant Statement from the New Hampshire GOP Chairman

As reported by NBC News, Chris Agers released a statement in response to concerns over Trump’s ballot access in New Hampshire. Agers maintained that any attempt to exclude candidates from the primary ballot would be staunchly opposed by the New Hampshire State Republican Party. He reinforced his trust in the secretary of state and the attorney general to uphold the integrity of the primary election, empowering voters to determine the best-suited nominee for the Republican Party.


The controversy surrounding Donald Trump’s potential removal from the New Hampshire Republican primary ballot highlighted the clash between political forces and the delicate nature of electoral processes. The initial flirtation with invoking the Fourteenth Amendment by Secretary of State David Scanlan sparked concern and widespread criticism. However, after facing public pressure and consulting with legal experts, Scanlan clarified his position, stating that he is not seeking to exclude any candidates from the ballot. The New Hampshire GOP, led by Chairman Chris Agers, staunchly defended the principles of freedom and democratic decision-making, vowing to resist any attempt to interfere with the primary election. Ultimately, the incident shed light on the significance of respecting voters’ choices and upholding the integrity of the election process.

Deja un comentario

Tu dirección de correo electrónico no será publicada. Los campos obligatorios están marcados con *

es_VEEspañol de Venezuela