Be nice to people. This changes the whole environment.
- Manlobbi
Stocks A to Z / Stocks B / Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A)
No. of Recommendations: 1
What if Trump simply runs, wins the republican primary and then the general election? What will stop him from assuming office in 2029?
Is that even feasible, or would a slew of state lawsuits prevent him from being on the ballot? Surely the SCOTUS wouldn't just ignore the the clear prohibition in the Constitution, would they?
No. of Recommendations: 2
Enough states will refuse to put him on the ballot that he could never get the EC votes needed to win.
I doubt he could get enough primary votes for the same reason. He won't be allowed on enough ballots.
No. of Recommendations: 5
or would a slew of state lawsuits prevent him from being on the ballot?
iirc, Colorado tried to keep him off the primary ballot, citing the insurrectionist clause of the 14th. SCOTUS said Colorado did not have authority to enforce Federal law.
So, basically, no, the states could not keep him off the ballot, by citing the provisions of an amendment to the Federal Constitution.
That's why I say Obama needs to say, publicly, now, that, if Trump runs in 28, he will too.
"If he runs, so will I. My top priority will be health insurance reform. The ACA was an imperfect stopgap, but it was the best we could get at the time. If elected, I will make it my mission to offer Medicare for everyone, financed by a VAT. No more complex subsidy schemes, that malignant actors can take away at their whim. No more employers forcing people to work, no matter how sick, to keep their insurance. Everyone gets health care insurance, because everyone buys things, hence, pays for their coverage. Don't be swayed by nonsense about "big gummit death panels". Private insurance companies that deny legitimate claims are the "death panels". Companies that force people to keep working, no matter how sick, to keep their insurance coverage, are the "death panels".
See? Messaging is easy, without the racism and religious extremism that the GOP has embraced.
Anecdote about employer provided health insurance. When I left the pump seal company, they brought in a young, fit, guy to replace me. A few years later, he developed cancer. The company required him to keep coming to work, or else they would take his health insurance away, and the medical bills would destroy him. Dave kept working, until the last few days before he died. The company didn't care about his welfare. They only cared about how much work they could extract from him. I find that monstrous, but that is how "health care" in Shinyland works.
Steve...Obama in 28
No. of Recommendations: 5
iirc, Colorado tried to keep him off the primary ballot, citing the insurrectionist clause of the 14th. SCOTUS said Colorado did not have authority to enforce Federal law.That's not exactly accurate. SCOTUS said that Colorado didn't have the authority to enforce the Insurrection Clause, because: i) that Clause specifically provided that Congress had the power to enforce it; and ii) it raised the likelihood of a "patchwork" of interpretation of what the Clause meant:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719...Neither of those things is true for the 22nd Amendment. There is no provision analogous to Section 5 of the 14th Amendment, and there is far less room for ambiguity over what circumstances fall within the Amendment's ambit. Which means that there's a stronger argument that the 22nd Amendment prohibition on being elected to the office of President more than twice is "self-executing" in a way that allows State action to enforce it.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Trump isn't running in 2028, lol.
What he's doing is feeding raw meat to the people who get spun up over statements like this. Trump knows it, routinely exploits it ("Canada ought to be the 51st state"), and revels in the response.
The only real question is why the democrats take the bait so much.
No. of Recommendations: 14
Neither of those things is true for the 22nd Amendment. There is no provision analogous to Section 5 of the 14th Amendment, and there is far less room for ambiguity over what circumstances fall within the Amendment's ambit. Which means that there's a stronger argument that the 22nd Amendment prohibition on being elected to the office of President more than twice is "self-executing" in a way that allows State action to enforce it.
People keep making the false assumption that the existing Constitution will still be enforced three years from now, just as they make the false assumption that there will be a regular, legal, unrigged, congressional election a year from now.
No. of Recommendations: 12
Trump isn't running in 2028, lol.
What he's doing is feeding raw meat to the people who get spun up over statements like this. Trump knows it, routinely exploits it ("Canada ought to be the 51st state"), and revels in the response.
The only real question is why the democrats take the bait so much.
Do you really think Trump will leave the White House voluntarily? He sure didn't last time. He did everything he possibly could to stay there. And when (I assume) someone finally talked enough sense into him to get him to leave, he did nothing to help the country by having a smooth, cooperative transition of administrations.
He does not care about the country and its laws and norms that have served us so well. He cares about himself.
No. of Recommendations: 1
only real question is why the democrats take the bait so much.
Probably because his statements are accompanied by a supine Republican congress and naked grab for control of election apparatus, and gerrymandering/voter suppression tactics seemingly across the board.
No. of Recommendations: 4
("Canada ought to be the 51st state"), and revels in the response.
Dope, you do realize that telling us he's baiting us with this 2028 running bit is one thing, but saying that Canada ought to be the 51st state, and you say he's riling up Canada and reveling in the response is quite another. It totally destroys any credibility for your initial statement. So we can only say Dope is being Dope again.
No. of Recommendations: 4
Probably because his statements are accompanied by a supine Republican congress and naked grab for control of election apparatus, and gerrymandering/voter suppression tactics seemingly across the board.
lol. So sez the party of c-shaped and worse Congressional districts.
The meltdown this board is going to have when the Supremes put a stop to it in May - and cost democrats 10+ seats next November - is going to be epic.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Even if Trump loses in 2028. He and MAGA will still have outsized power over how things go.
Sort of like ....2020-2024.
Sort of like UK, Spain. Italy, Japan, Austria, and others.
SheepleIsm breeds MAGA and ....then helps put MAGA in its sweet spot: Out of power, BUT with a plurality enough to be able to blame the other side, while gumming up the works from the cheaper seats.
It's happened over and over.
But Sheeple, can't think outside the media meme of the day.
Which for Trump is good --- Sheeple is the swing vote that put him in power.
