Surely we would all actually show up to try to fight this, right? If it passed.
this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2025
604 points (98.2% liked)
politics
19607 readers
3778 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Absolutely. People talk about another civil war. If you start hearing about spontaneous violence in the streets, that's when you need to worry. I think if this actually passed, we'd start hearing about stuff like that.
Realistically, Republicans know this has no chance of passing. Frankly, I think this is just mean-spirited trolling--which is a good indicator of the state of our politics. We want to see the other side suffer.
They introduce it now, and even some conservatives laugh it off as "just a joke," but within the next 4 years, it will be raised many more times, each time with them getting more serious. They put it out there like this so it's less shocking the second, third, and fourth time you hear it. By the end, every conservative bootlicking moron will be lining up to say "presidents should be allowed to have an uninterrupted span of 8 years of rule so as to enact the agenda we 'voted' for!"
It's predictable. I'm going to buy some guns and start hitting the range.
load more comments
(7 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Well if the heritage Foundation is going to follow the book of revelation, he needs to be there for 7.5 years.
Stop hand wringing in here. It's fucking stupid, and a PR play. You need 38 states for a constitutional amendment, and that isn't happening however you slice it.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Knowing Trump, I wouldn't be surprised if he went full Nayib Bukele and sent in troops to influence the vote.
And as much as I like Bukele, he presided over unique circumstances where his country was effectively being ruled by MS-13 and his actions were warranted in the case of being elected leader of a country ruled by drug overlords. The USA is going through no such crisis.
That will never happen, legally, anyway.
However
22nd amendment says:
Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. ...
So what they are gonna do is that:
They are gonna argue that presidents are not "elected" but appointed by the Electoral College, therefore the 22nd amendment doesn't apply and hereby null and void.
Or just use elect VP + accension to presidency loophole, and run a dead person as President, then trump as VP, since the placeholder name they put for president isn't alive, VP become president.
Or just cast placeholder names for presidency and VP, and use the Speaker role as acting president.
There are so many loopholes that doesn't require repealing 22nd amendment.
load more comments
(7 replies)
Pretty fucking gross if you ask me.