• Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Of course. For Trump, presidency goes to the highest bidder. Musk just outbid Vance, that’s all.

  • DrFistington@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Welp, you heard the news JD. There’s only one way for you to become president…so get to work. I mean as long as you say its an official act you can do the deed yourself and aparently its totally legal.

  • Windex007@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Things have changed a lot since '14.

    Like “on the one hand it’s a hassle having your husband be president”

    “… Buton the other hand… I want my daughters to have rights…”

  • archonet@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    94
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    Perhaps because he doesn’t seem to think there will be a need for a 2028 presidential race. Did he not say “you won’t need to vote anymore” to his supporters after the 2024 election?

    • LucidNightmare@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Just a correction, he didn’t say this after, he literally said it a few days before the election… :(

    • adarza@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      60
      ·
      16 hours ago

      yes. yes he did. that either means he’s establishing himself as dicktator for life, or he’s gonna fuck up the country so much there won’t be a government to elect in 2028. his actions thus far, it’s hard to tell which way he’s aiming that malformed 'shroom of his.

  • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Trump cannot fathom a world where he’s not the center. So to him, the 2028 election doesn’t exist. It doesn’t dawn on him that the republican party will NEVER stand in the way of the 2 term limit, for one important reason. If they ever lose, they may never win again. Imagine if Obama had been allowed to run for a 3rd term. We’d be on his 6th term right now.

    So republicans don’t want to risk that.

    It’s like being 4th and 9. You punt. Unless you’re close enough for a field goal. But you don’t run a play and risk losing everything.

    • kobra@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      republicans have thus far been willing to risk literally the entire constitution/democratic process, but term limits for president would be the line they don’t cross?

      • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Because its the one that has consequences.

        If they kill democracy, or kill the constitution, that just means THEY’RE in charge.

        But if they go against term limits, there is no more inevitable back and forth. There could be a time where the democrats gain power, and without term limits, never give it up.

        Whereas this way, they continue to make slow progress thats never interupted. They don’t want to risk that.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        9 hours ago

        To quote (Barack) Obama when he was asked in '14 or '15 about hypothetically running for reelection again if it somehow became legal, “Michelle would kill [him]”

        She’s done with the whole political pageantry bullshit, if her absences from hollow political theatre events like the Trump inauguration are any indication.

        Good for her, I say.

      • LengAwaits@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Unfortunately, the legislative policy that’s being floated in the House is that a president can seek a third term only if their first two terms were non-consecutive. (Source)