As planned, the stunlock proceeds
this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2025
599 points (98.5% liked)
politics
19538 readers
3639 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
I don't think they want Obama running again..... He whooped their ass twice.
Yep. That's why it's worded so that he couldn't run again. Only allows non-consecutive two termers to run again.
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.
He will use Musk's money, again, to cheat, again, in my opinion.
Of course he will wreck the rather healthy US economy and break the unemployment record again, which he currently holds from his 1st term.
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."
This amendment’s wording wouldn’t allow Obama or Clinton to run again. Only Trump.
He has never won as the incumbent.
I miss having this level of certainty that he has no chance.
That was one race, and during a pandemic that probably would have lost the race for any incumbent, whether it made logical sense or not.
Frankly I kind of wish he won his second term if he had to get another term at all. His bruised ego over losing, fear of legal consequences, and time away to stew on this have made him a far more dangerous president than last time.
And while i think he'd struggle in that scenario I've gotten very wary of people (myself included) thinking "he can't possibly win in this scenario" because that's twice now been the prelude to defeat. Wheras in 2020 he was taken as a serious threat from the start
Seems more like someone sucking up to Trump rather than something they realistically believe they could get passed
And we were all overreacting about Roe v Wade. "Precedent", "established law", "checks and balances". It could never happen, they said.
I really would like to see some of those checks and balances I've heard so much about. Must have gotten confused—it's cheques for the rich, on our dime, to make their balance keeps going up.
Yeah there is less than zero percent chance this happens.
Reminder that they control all branches of government and can do whatever the hell they want.
Even though I partially agree that it’s probably somebody sucking up instead of them passing a “remove all term limits” bill instead.
Or maybe they’re just testing the waters and compliance of the people currently elected, heck if I know.
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.
What democracy? We've been living in a police state our entire lives. Talk about a dangerous way of thinking, ffs, how many hundreds of thousands of people were murdered under the Bush administration alone, and you act like that was just healthy democracy? Why were Bush and Obama on the same page about the erosion of our civil liberties and global imperialism? I swear, some of you are just miles from the correct explanation.
This one won't happen though. It doesn't have the votes. It would require a Constitutional amendment, and thus a LOT of Democrats on board.
You can't freak out about every possible thing.
When every possible thing is this fucking freaky, we can indeed freak out about them.
view more: next ›