this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2025
604 points (98.2% liked)

politics

19607 readers
3912 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 215 points 6 days ago (2 children)

It’s impressive how hard these people lick boots.

[–] [email protected] 80 points 6 days ago (2 children)

But also how shameless they are, doing it in full public view

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 129 points 6 days ago (15 children)

It's cute how so many in the comments think the legal checks will prevent this. They don't care about the law or the Constitution in the same way they don't care about optics, hypocrisy, decorum, or process. People keep viewing this through the lense of American democracy. None of that matters to fascists.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 6 days ago

Yeah, people don't seem to truly understand this, and I fear it will take something extreme before they do... And it's likely already too late now, let alone by then.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 66 points 6 days ago (8 children)

What a frivolous waste of congressional speaking time. I thought these guys had real problems to solve? I thought Trump was gonna fix it all this time around? You're telling me not even 1 week into his new term and he's already thinking about how the job won't be done in time?

Conservatives are pathetic.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 88 points 6 days ago

“It is imperative that we provide President Trump with every resource necessary to correct the disastrous course set by the Biden administration,” Ogles said in a statement

so Biden created a bad situation for him in 4 years, yet he thinks Trump needs 8 years to undo it. Sounds like a skill issue to me.

[–] [email protected] 80 points 6 days ago (15 children)

Good job guys, you saved Palestine!

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] [email protected] 131 points 6 days ago (9 children)

Good fucking luck with that hurdle.

They need a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate; or a conventio called by Congress at the request of two-thirds of the state legislatures. Then it has to be ratified by the legislatures of three-quarters of the states.

Even if they managed a super majority on both sides of Congress for Trumplefuck, there's no way they're getting 38 States to agree to that.

[–] [email protected] 114 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I don't think the law is a restricting factor for the trump regime.

[–] [email protected] 57 points 6 days ago (1 children)

That's what the Trump regime wants us to think.

[–] [email protected] 57 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Laws only apply if they are enforced.

[–] [email protected] 62 points 6 days ago

Which is why I often find myself saying the Trump admin will face one of two types of justice: vigilante or none.

[–] [email protected] 73 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (7 children)

It's sad that you guys still think the rule of the constitution is some massive roadblock that they've somehow missed. They literally made an Executive Order that just says "No" to the very first sentence of the 14th amendment, do you think none of them noticed? They get to have a vote about ludicrous things, and they get to gleefully destroy the lives of any Republican who dares vote against them. Maybe it gets struck down for the time being? Who cares, the courts are packed, they can realistically just start killing people pretty soon and it'll start with the disloyals and the true believers as needed as it always does.

You cannot logical trap nor get off on technicalities fascists. It does not matter to them, they will just do what they want anyways, all that matters is if they can crush anyone who tries to stop them.

They are pushing the boundaries of the conversation and they are testing the waters, and every time they're pushed back on they use the limp push back to consolidate more power because nobody has been willing to actually stop them.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 33 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Trump is the candidate during next election

Red States let him be an option even though they shouldn't

He wins enough red States to have a majority

They name him president even though it's against the Constitution

The supreme Court is packed with his picks so they don't do anything about it

Tada! Civil war? Dissolution of the USA? Who knows!?!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I don't think they want Obama running again..... He whooped their ass twice.

[–] [email protected] 85 points 6 days ago (2 children)

In order for it to pass, they need 290 votes in the House. The Republicans currently have 220 votes, so they would need 70 Democrats to flip.

Then it goes to the Senate where they need 67 votes. First, 60 to get past the inevitable filibuster, and with 53 votes, Republicans need 7 Democrats to flip to move it forward and 14 to pass it.

Then, the fun part, they need 38 states to ratify it. Trump did win 31 states, so he would still need 7 Harris states to ratify an amendment.

[–] [email protected] 83 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (5 children)

Nah. They're just gonna say "whachu gonna do about it" as he sits in the office for the third time. Or the richest men in the world backing the regime will just ~~bri~~ lobby.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 36 points 5 days ago

From the article:

Ogles’ resolution is tailored specifically to permit Trump to serve a third term, but not to allow three out of the four living former presidents to serve third terms.

It's a Trump only privilege which, given the track record, could have been assumed, unfortunately.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 days ago (3 children)

It obviously won't get close to passing but it would be incredible for Democrats if it did. He has zero margin in the House, nothing major is passing into law except tax cuts. All his executive order policies are inflationary.

So either he's crashing the economy, taking the blame for continued inflation, or getting nothing of consequence done. And he'd be 83 and asking for four more years. He'd get crushed.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 days ago

He will use Musk's money, again, to cheat, again, in my opinion.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (5 children)

We've played this game twice now. Let's not try a third game of fascism chicken

That said Obama vs trump would be a funny campaign. "My fellow Americans, look at this absolute buffoon. You want proof I'm a natural born citizen? I've been stuck here with him too."

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 days ago

This amendment’s wording wouldn’t allow Obama or Clinton to run again. Only Trump.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 58 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 6 days ago

Didn't even wait a whole week. Emporer Trump inbound

[–] [email protected] 41 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (11 children)

A constitutional amendment required 2/3s House and Senate AND 3/4 of states. And they don’t have that. This is more bullshit to distract.

To amend the U.S. Constitution, a proposed amendment must be approved by a two-thirds majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, and then ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures (38 out of 50 states). Alternatively, an amendment can be proposed by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures, but this method has never been used.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 6 days ago (4 children)

This is more bullshit to distract.

This is saying it louder for the people in the back. Musk's Nazi Salute isn't getting the message across? Okay, how about this?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 29 points 5 days ago

The Right has outgrown their use for masks.

[–] [email protected] 67 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Me as a Tennessean: "I bet it's Andy Ogles"

Checks

Goddamn can I read that man like a fucking book. I'm sorry we're all trying to vote the bastard out but the State gerrymandered the district because... AND I SHIT YOU NOT... "California does it, so it's okay if we do it too". Honest to God what our State Assembly said about breaking Nashville up into a hellscape of gerrymandering.

Do know, he's an idiot IRL as well. He's the kind that's really full of himself and he's got a super high self-worth in head.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

To amend the United States Constitution, a proposed amendment must be approved by Congress and ratified by three-fourths of the states. The process is outlined in Article V of the Constitution.

Congress: A two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate is required

Constitutional convention: Two-thirds of state legislatures must call for a convention

Ratification: Three-fourths of state legislatures or conventions must ratify the amendment

Each state legislature must vote on the amendment in an up-or-down vote

State legislatures cannot change the language of the amendment

This is DOA

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Trump is not exactly a spring chicken. He is one mild medical event to being in the history book.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 38 points 6 days ago (6 children)

Pretty cool how we have the freedumb to install a dictator.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 66 points 6 days ago (8 children)

Imagine the Dems brought Obama back

[–] [email protected] 60 points 6 days ago (2 children)

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than three times, nor be elected to any additional term after being elected to two consecutive terms...

Obama served 2 consecutive terms so would be ineligible. They literally wrote this so that only Trump would be eligible.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 36 points 6 days ago (6 children)

So where them 2A folk at LOL

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 days ago (5 children)

Seems more like someone sucking up to Trump rather than something they realistically believe they could get passed

[–] [email protected] 24 points 5 days ago (3 children)

That's a really dangerous way of thinking. We can no longer normalize this stuff by going "it'll never actually happen." It CAN happen. Get your head out of the sand and stop minimizing the very real threat our democracy is facing.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 6 days ago (7 children)

Obama returns to the presidency in 2028!

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 42 points 6 days ago

Standard traitor shit.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Wonderful idea, I can't wait for a third Obama term.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 5 days ago

It’s written to exclude Obama.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 6 days ago (5 children)

'No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than three times, nor be elected to any additional term after being elected to two consecutive terms," the amendment states. Former Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama all served two consecutive terms, and thus would be barred from being elected to a third term. But not Trump, who is the first president since Grover Cleveland in 1892 to be elected to a second, non-consecutive term.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 44 points 6 days ago (21 children)

Do they really expect their orange beanbag leader to still be alive in four years? And if he still is, to still be able to know his own name or speak coherently in public?

load more comments (21 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 6 days ago

The neo-Nazi filled GOP can shove their 3rd term idea where the sun does not shine.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 6 days ago (3 children)

FTA" "Trump “has proven himself to be the only figure in modern history capable of reversing our nation’s decay and restoring America to greatness, and he must be given the time necessary to accomplish that goal,”" - He hasn't don't anything yet!! How has he 'proven himself'

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›