Obama - Return of the Jedi
this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2025
394 points (99.0% liked)
politics
20366 readers
3612 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
Yeah well, the Constitution says a lot of things. However, it’s fairly clear a large segment of the American population doesn’t care what the Constitution says as long as it’s their team in power.
Criminals aren't allowed to run for president either. Here we are.
According to the Supreme Court of the United States of America, Jefferson Davis and General Robert E. Lee are both eligible for the office of the United States of America (if they were still alive at least).
Why do news stations make these stupid short clips with music and pictures? Just show the clip
Barred? By whom? Really, when will the states wake up and figure out there is no "adult" in the wings that will enforce norms.
It is unlikely that the constitution will be amended. Democrats still (and will always) hold roughly 50% of seats in the Congress. So any proposal to amendment will not pass. However, there is a possibility of coup if Trump does not want to step down.
My guy, 2 years from now, there will be a redder wave from a kangaroo election, and they will amend the Constitution and end whatever is left of democracy. CISA is gutted, and will be replaced with lackeys that will confirm the fake election. We're cooked.
You mean another coup? Another in addition to the first coup, in which several people were killed and sh*t smeared on the walls of the capitol, when people had to hide for their lives and in which some of the protectors were complicit?
The one after which the ringleader went completely unpunished and then got back into power and released the people who'd actually done it on his behalf?
I know this is crazytown now, but we don't want to forget about that first coup.
They just illegally fired, and replaced the joint chiefs. What makes you think they aren't going to arrest and replace all the democratic representatives and senators?
We're already past The Reichstag Fire
He will be trying to make The Fediverse illegal in the US within the next 6 months.
I could be wrong, but aren't joint chiefs appointed by the president nonetheless?
You're not wrong, there was nothing illegal about firing the joint chiefs.
It was stupid, but not illegal. Calling everything Trump does illegal, only serves to dilute the impact when he does actual illegal things.
Much like labeling everything 'Nazi', it only serves to cheapen the term.
Some Lemmy users even go so far as say there is equivalent of Reichstag fire event in US. Trump is only in office for one month and I didn't see the Congress get burned, pinned the blame on an opposing group, and then made Trump demand for absolute power. Is Trump bad? Yes, but let's not exaggerate. There are still checks and balance working as intended (many courts are still blocking many of Trump's executive decisions after all). People need to relax and get a cool head first. Because decisions made on emotions will only blunder.
Any time Trump jokes, it's the camel's nose under the tent.
I've never heard that phrase before that's an excellent phrase.
Can you enlighten me? I don't understand the phrase.
Camels, much like dogs, cats, and other domesticated animals, are constantly pushing their boundaries. The phrase "a camel's nose under the tent" is indicative of a camel that is attempting to find a way inside the tent so that they may eat the, most likely, food that has captured their attention with its scent.
This would be applicable to the Drumpf administration because they are, much like the camel, using a method of "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks," as well as a method of overwhelming the media with birdshot. Namely, if you're creating 50 stories a day, and doing 50 things a day, then the media and the government can't keep up.
Again similar to our camel that has enough strength to tip the tent over, and create a royal mess, in its attempt to get in.
Edit: First time I have heard the phrase as well,.but that is the meaning I would take from context.
I looked it up when I saw it, it seems like it comes from a fable with a similar moral to "If You Give a Mouse a Cookie"
A camel sticks his nose under the edge of a tent for warmth, it's owner (or a stranger w/e) allows it to out of kindness. Then the camel slowly worms it's entire body in the tent and refuses to budge.
It's a slippery slope parable.
In a sane society Trump should be in prison.
I also had no idea. This is what I found.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camel's_nose
The camel's nose is a metaphor for a situation where the permitting of a small, seemingly innocuous act will open the door for larger, clearly undesirable actions.
Of course he'll run and of course he'll win and og course he'll just ignore the laws about it and of course nobody is going to stop him
I can't see him still being alive by then. He's going to have a stroke or coronary before then.
Or some other mysterious 3rd option
Imagine if a MacDonald's worker on minimum wage slipped something in his slimeburger.
load more comments
(2 replies)
To be fair he wasn't supposed to run for a second term as a convicted felon, but he managed that.
I'd like to say I'd be surprised if he could win another election as his popularity plummets, but the US voters have proven themselves to be stupid and/or lazy.
Being a convicted felon does not disqualify you from running for president, or from being elected to the office.
Fomenting insurrection does, but that got waved away "because reasons".
Because Merrick Garland is a bitch. Also more stuff.
Nah, Colorado was handling it appropriately, then SCOTUS stepped in and told a state that they're not allowed to administer elections in their state.
Why not both?
Because given how shameless SCOTUS has been, not sure there's even an alternative reality where they still don't worm themselves around him too.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(14 replies)
I wouldn’t be surprised. He promised an end of elections and voting. This is what his voters wanted.
load more comments
(6 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
On November 2028, he'll be older than Joe Biden is now.
But yeah, I can see him enter the 2028 GOP primaries, win the nomination, maybe beat Harris again, and serve as acting President while SCOTUS allows it.
you think they’ll repeal the 22nd amendment and we’d see Harris? Please it’d be Obama v Trump
Obama would easily win which is why all the bills have been worded to exclude him.
Do you have examples?
Yes. To allow a third term; if the president have not served two consecutive ones.
It says elected. He has no intention of having another election.
The US is right in a coup. Who knows what will be legal or illegal after that.
Who's gonna stop him from running for or taking office for a third time? The Democrats? Are they gonna write a strongly worded letter? The Supreme Court? Do they have anyone with guns who will listen to them?
load more comments
(1 replies)
Legal experts say the Constitution is clear that he cannot run, though some supporters, including Rep. Andy Ogles and Steve Bannon, are pushing for a constitutional amendment or a 2028 campaign.
It's a non-starter.
You need at minimum three-quarters of states for an amendment, and that's if you take the constitutional convention route. Even if you got every Republican-majority state onboard, which I very much doubt -- I think that there are a very considerable number of Republican politicians who are glad that Trump has managed to pull in a majority and are happy to maybe use some of his tactics but are also more than happy to see him ride off into the sunset and let them run things -- that's still not going to be enough.
Also, I don't know if ratification is just the upper house (almost all states have a bicameral legislature) or both or if it varies by state, but if it's both, that's an even higher bar.
kagis
Sounds like it's both.
https://www.ncsl.org/about-state-legislatures/amending-the-us-constitution
Step 3. Ratification by three-fourths of the states. Ratification of the amendment language adopted by Congress is an up-or-down vote in each legislative chamber. A state legislature cannot change the language. If it does, its ratification is invalid. A governor’s signature on the ratification bill or resolution is not necessary.
So you have to get a majority of legislators in both legislative houses in a three-quarters supermajority of states. That's a pretty high bar.
How many other things is he not allowed to do, but is doing anyway with permission (either tacit or direct) from congress and the courts? You think this will stop him?
Words on a piece of paper only have power if people uphold them. No one's upholding them.
What's stopping him making an executive order claiming he can do it, use that as an excuse to run a clearly illegal campaign, use his control of the FEC to win and dare anyone to do smth about it?
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›