politics
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
view the rest of the comments
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 Garland too, regardless of what he did or how fast.
Because Biden appointed a bitch instead of someone who would actually do their goddamn job.
As convicted felon you can't run for position of burger flipper at McDonalds, but you can become a president...
I mean the reason why someone shouldn't be barred for office based on a conviction is obvious
And if you, and potentially multiple family members, don't pass a background check... you still qualify!
I mean, it should be fine to stop someone from running a country if they are a felon, but that requires sane, rational adults.
No. It should never be fine. People make mistakes. People fix those mistakes. But more importantly, you never want it possible for a political arrest to disbar a person from office.
Problem is he wasn't just arrested. Convicted by a jury, incited an insurrection on live TV, retained classified documents and hid them from the FBI, and attempted a coup with the fake electors scheme...it's a massive leap beyond just being "arrested".
He's literally guilty of blatant treason. That should obviously be disqualifying. Brazil, which might be considered a "third world country" by many Americans, handled their similar situation infinitely better.
Sure. Pardons are a thing. And again I said sane, rational adults. I'm not saying that there ARE sane rational adults, I'm saying in an idyllic world
Political convictions are also a thing. Just convict your opponent and you're good.
Hence, the sane rational adults, and the idyllic world bit
A sane, rational adult would understand any system that relies on them being sane and rational is a poorly made system
idyllic world
People don't fucking read
Eugene V Debs is the best example for why that's not the case.
All of that looks like the lack of rational adults to me
I wouldn’t be surprised. He promised an end of elections and voting. This is what his voters wanted.
Take the good with the bad, if we have to re-do the voting system I say we move towards a more popular-voting system and get rid of the electoral collage, it’s time to shake up the gerrymandering of districts in favor of GOP Senators/Congress.
Time for an overhaul!
I think he's aiming more to become an emperor. That said, I like the positive outlook! If he fucking ruins everything, there's always room for the Americans to build something better in the mess he leaves.
I've been thinking about this a lot recently. The abject destruction of all aspects of law and government being carried out by Trump/Musk right now is, objectively, a bad thing that's going to hurt a lot of people very badly. But once their system inevitably completely collapses, I think a lot of Americans are going to be open to new ideas of governance.
Previously, we could all see problems in our systems but the path to actually getting them solved involved generations of focused political maneuvering to actually stand a chance of putting them in place. Take federal adoption of ranked choice voting as an example. Many people would say they were in favor of that but we all knew it had a snowball's chance in hell of ever actually happening because of how our system of governance was set up. I fully expected we'd just coast along with FPTP voting until we're all dead from climate catastrophe.
But now, we're actually looking at a potential full scale, whole hog destruction of the foundations of American government. Whoever inherits it afterward - and someone will, this reign won't last forever, it's incapable of sustaining itself even if we all just left them alone - has the potential for nearly a ground-up rewrite of some fundamental assumptions of American government. We're talking about changing the baseline voting systems, changing eligibility for office for many roles, even fundamentally changing the way our representation is appointed (such as by population size instead of by land, for instance - one rep for every, say, 500,000 citizens, not two reps per state regardless of population) and so on.
Rising from our own ashes may just end up being one of the best things to ever happen to America, in a historical context. Inevitably, no matter how this farce ends up resolving, we will have an opportunity for this afterward. Trump, in his bumbling fury, has swept away decades worth of red tape and inertia that we otherwise would have had to struggle through to make this happen, and in addition has galvanized a lot of latent anger with the system within the citizens. We will have a real chance to turn that into something constructive after all this finishes in whatever way it does.
That's my light at the end of the tunnel for all this, and in a weird way, I guess I have Trump to thank for this. His signature style of completely ignoring norms and regulations means that he can blast through a ton of bullshit while being completely immune to the feedback, and we can just build it all up again from scratch later in a term or two instead of taking six decades to effect gradual change.
Previously I would have called this accelerationism and maybe condemned it, but we're in the shit now, so may as well get it over with I guess. He's already throwing all his toys out of the crib no matter what I say about it so I'm no longer ashamed about cheering for it. America has had a deep sickness in its government for a very long time and maybe now we can excise it. We're losing a lot of healthy tissue alongside it, and that's bad, but it's not likely to kill us altogether. We'll grow back stronger.
I've thought the same but this is all dependant on someone sane being able to take power back at some point soon. Where will all the crazies be when this better society is being created?
The climate catastrophe is also a ticking time bomb with very little time left to avert total disaster. The other problem is that Putin caused this situation for a reason and honestly I'm thinking he destabilised the world because there's a plan involved. Call me crazy but Russia, China and whoever could be aiming to invade. What else are they playing at? They're all megalomaniacs and they're going to control all these countries where the US was giving aid (and I'm sure spying).
And then there's an asteroid, currently a 3% chance of hitting. Have you seen 'don't look up'?
Alaska already has ranked choice voting
Emperor Trump, a man who cannot be trusted to run a charity in the state of New York….
That, and we have that stupid Electoral College. Oh, and lots and lots of fuckery from the Republican apparatchiks when it comes to running our elections.
He wasn't technically a convicted felon until sentencing, and IANAL, I think that falls under shit no one thought would ever happen.
Being an insurrectionist is a guilty until proven innocent thing as far as the constitution goes iirc. At least in regards to holding office.
I hate to ‘akshualllyyy’, but actually there’s nothing in US law or the constitution that precludes a convicted felon from running for or holding office.
There was a lot of legal talk leading up to the last election about that, along with plenty of surprise that was the case. It turns out it was another of those gentlemen’s agreements that was never codified because up until very recently, most people just assumed voters were smart enough not to elect someone like that, so codifying it wasn’t worth anyone’s time.
If we ever wrest control back from these ghouls, there are a shit-ton of things that need codifying.
e: a few words