So what form does the resistance take?

Safe-Keeper said:
I doubt Dump is going to be in any condition to run for anything come 2028. In fact, I'm surprised he's lasted this long. Also, his influence and appeal was clearly waning even this election. Sure, it might be rejuvenated now that he somehow became POTUS again, but his condition will just keep deteriorating.
Click to expand...
I wish, but poor mental and physical health isn't always an indication of longevity--my father was grossly overweight, had a horrible diet, drank and smoke heavily, had heart disease and alzheimer's--but he would have lived to 100 if an accident didn't get him in his mid 80s. He had the same attitude as trump "im the most healthy person alive!!" so apparently attitude accounts for more than reality. And even if he does deteriorate rapidly, his sycophants will just inject him with embalming fluid and the few times he is forced to speak or appear publicly it will probably be a body double, kind of like the Maggats insisted about Biden. I'm half joking...
 
Hercules56 said:
Some states may sue and try to not comply with Trump orders.
Click to expand...
Or secede--Texas threatened to do it a few times, I'm surprised CA hasn't already announced they're leaving. Maybe they should start with Hawaii, it would be harder to send troops there...
 
stanfr said:
and the few times he is forced to speak or appear publicly it will probably be a body double, kind of like the Maggats insisted about Biden. I'm half joking...
Click to expand...
Somewhere out there an obese jaundiced orangutan sat up in fear, realizing that if it were just 50% uglier it might get shanghaied into being Trump's body double!

Just kidding, of course they'll use one of the dead obese jaundiced orangutans they collected last time. The trick is to not preserve them with dessicants, the rotting is an integral part of the whole Trump ambience.
 
TragicMonkey said:
Somewhere out there an obese jaundiced orangutan sat up in fear, realizing that if it were just 50% uglier it might get shanghaied into being Trump's body double!

Just kidding, of course they'll use one of the dead obese jaundiced orangutans they collected last time. The trick is to not preserve them with dessicants, the rotting is an integral part of the whole Trump ambience.
Click to expand...
I would imagine the dessicants would give the game away because they suppress the odor.
 
dudalb said:
A lot of what he proposed to do will not be popular with people who voted for him when they understand it will cut programs they like
and they will let the house rep know they don;t like it.
Click to expand...

This is the problem. The people were not well informed. In fact, the people were deliberately misinformed.

A feature, of course, not a bug.
 
Darat said:
It does because you don't need to change the constitution, your governance is set up for the supreme court to be... well the word is supreme, they decide what the constitution means. You may assume it means one thing, but if they say it means something else that's the beginning and end of it. In other words, you may think that the 22nd amendment means Trump can't serve a 3rd term but if the SCOTUS majority decision is that "in these circumstances" it doesn't apply to Trump and he can stand for a third term that's it, he can stand for a third term without a single change to even a comma in the text of the amendment.
Click to expand...


How did Roe v Wade get overturned then?

I think it's safer to say that the constitution means whatever the majority ideology of SCOTUS thinks it means, and that may and can change over time, but that's just my opinion. Your mileage may vary of course.


-
 
AmyStrange said:
How did Roe v Wade get overturned then?
Click to expand...

By precisely the reasoning outlined in the post you quoted.

The Supreme Court adjudicated one way. Later, they adjudicated a different way. Nothing in the legislation changed.

Same with the second amendment interpretation.
 
3point14 said:
By precisely the reasoning outlined in the post you quoted.

The Supreme Court adjudicated one way. Later, they adjudicated a different way. Nothing in the legislation changed.

Same with the second amendment interpretation.
Click to expand...


Aren't you just paraphrasing what I posted, and then cutting that part out?

...I think it's safer to say that the constitution means whatever the majority ideology of SCOTUS thinks it means, and that may and can change over time...
Click to expand...


-
 
AmyStrange said:
Aren't you just paraphrasing what I posted, and then cutting that part out?
Click to expand...

Yeah. I thought the answer to your question was contained within your post. I was confused at the question.

You seemed to be disagreeing with something? I probably read it wrong.
 
3point14 said:
Yeah. I thought the answer to your question was contained within your post. I was confused at the question.

You seemed to be disagreeing with something? I probably read it wrong.
Click to expand...


I was just emphasizing something as a prerequisite to what I thought was the better answer, but you're right. I was disagreeing with the statement that each SCOTUS ruling was the beginning and the END of whatever constitutional question they were deciding upon.

There seems to be and probably will be a lot more of that going on with the present SCOTUS.


-
 
Last edited:
3point14 said:
This is the problem. The people were not well informed. In fact, the people were deliberately misinformed.

A feature, of course, not a bug.
Click to expand...


I agree, although, it seemed to me that most of the maga weirdoes loved being misinformed even though there was a lot of information out there to prove them wrong. Christ, all you had to do was listen to the guy talk and be awake rather than asleep to know that he was stupid, but instead, they maga-explained what he really meant with gibberish, the official language of magaville.

It may be argued that there were a lot of folks out there other than the maga idiots who voted for trump, but let's be honest, if wasn't for his maga minions, trump and what's name would never have been elected.


-
 
Grizzly Bear said:
This may come as news to you, but Trump can only be in office for 4 years. He's term limited out in 2028 since he's already served one term.......
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t a friendly Supreme Court be able to hand him an extra term?

Edit: Hm, ninja’ed long ago it seems.
 
Last edited:
AmyStrange said:
I was just emphasizing something as a prerequisite to what I thought was the better answer, but you're right. I was disagreeing with the statement that each SCOTUS ruling was the beginning and the END of whatever constitutional question they were deciding upon.

There seems to be and probably be a lot more of that going on with the present SCOTUS.


-
Click to expand...

Ah! That makes more sense! Thank you!
 
steenkh said:
Wouldn’t a friendly Supreme Court be able to hand him an extra term?
Click to expand...


Good question. They may decide that what the constitution actually meant was TWO CONSECUTIVE terms rather than two terms total. I wouldn't put it past them.

They might also decide that if a majority of the voters want him to run, that it negates the constitution, and I know that one sounds pretty far out, but once again, I wouldn't put it past them to come up with some cock and bull story to make it happen.


-
 
Last edited:
steenkh said:
Wouldn’t a friendly Supreme Court be able to hand him an extra term?
Click to expand...
Well, he's been joking about hanging around.

President-elect Donald Trump does not appear to be interested in assuaging any concerns about a total pursuit of power.

Speaking before the House Republican Conference on Wednesday, the 78-year-old soon-to-be forty-seventh president openly joked about running for a third term, telling the crowd that they could “figure something else out.”

“I suspect I won’t be running again unless you say he’s so good we got to figure something else out,” Trump said while laughing, according to the Associated Press’s Farnoush Amiri.
Click to expand...
If he can "figure something out," he will.
 
AmyStrange said:
Good question. They may decide that what the constitution actually meant was TWO CONSECUTIVE terms rather than two terms total. I wouldn't put it past them.

They might also decide that if a majority of the voters want him to run, that it negates the constitution, and I know that one sounds pretty far out, but once again, I wouldn't put it past them to come up with some cock and bull story to make it happen.


-
Click to expand...
I wouldn't put it past them either. Over and over again people have and will overestimate how secure democracy is.
If both the legislature and President are behind them, who's gonna stop it? Only a popular revolt.
I guarantee you the founding fathers didn't come up with the idea of installing rulers for life who can do whatever the heck they want with the
guiding principles of the nation they founded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom