• DaddleDew@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    149
    ·
    3 days ago

    The man who has already attempted a coup

    The man who has proven again and again that he will do just about anything to ensure he doesn’t lose the majority he needs to not get impeached

    The man who is a known compulsive cheater

    The man who tried to call people to “find more votes” for him

    The man who blatantly used jerrymandering to secure enough seats to maintain his majority

    The man who knows damn well is in the gutters in the polls and who knows will never win the next election if it is fair.

    You are asking if he is preparing a coup?

    The outcome of the movie Titanic was less predictable than that.

    • JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      If the voters sit it out again, whadyagonnadoaboutit? Those idiots own every single day of this term.

    • zergtoshi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      Isn’t there a 22nd amendment to the constitution, which says a president can be elected for a maximum of two terms?
      But why should that amendmend specifically or the constitution at all be respected by a criminal?

      • DaddleDew@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        The problem is that Trump has demonstrated many times already that he doesn’t let things like the Constitution stop him from doing what he wants

        • zergtoshi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          That’s what the second paragraph of my comment was about.
          I don’t want to normalize his behaviour by not even telling what he’s about to violate, violates or has violated.

      • Dentzy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        They have already presented the idea that the limit is for “two consecutive terms” so it wouldn’t apply to him; it is bullshit -of course-, but that’s the excuse they will feed their base and the MAGAs will parrot it gladly. So, yes there is an amendment against it, but no, it won’t stop them from pushing a third term (or simply extend his current one by preventing elections altogether).