this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2025
494 points (98.6% liked)

politics

24826 readers
1675 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon revealed that MAGA operatives are "working on" securing Donald Trump a third presidential term in 2028, despite constitutional term limits.

In an interview with Chris Cuomo, Bannon said, "We'll see what the definition of term limit is," suggesting they're exploring ways to circumvent the 22nd Amendment.

Recently released from prison after serving four months for contempt of Congress, Bannon placed second in a CPAC straw poll for 2028 GOP nominees behind JD Vance, while maintaining tensions with Trump adviser Elon Musk.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ceenote@lemmy.world 97 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Bannon placed second in a CPAC strawpoll

My first thought: That'd be great, there's no way he'd win

My second thought: Democrats would find a way.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 50 points 4 months ago (1 children)

My first thought: That’d be great, there’s no way he’d win

Remember, the overwhelming majority of the country thought the exact same thing about Trump in 2016.

[–] qprimed@lemmy.ml 13 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

as parent intimated: Democrats will find a way. :-(

[–] thefartographer@lemm.ee 9 points 4 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] oppy1984@lemm.ee 37 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Democrats, the masters of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

[–] Franklin@lemmy.ca 9 points 4 months ago (1 children)

i mean let's give Putin some credit too, his disinformation campaigns and bot farms have been a master class in manipulating public perception. that's to say nothing of the Twitter/X situation

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 52 points 4 months ago (1 children)

They're putting a LOT of faith in those arteries holding up that long LMFAO

[–] TipRing@lemmy.world 29 points 4 months ago (10 children)

We’ll see what the definition of term limit is

It's right there in the amendment:

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

Donald Trump was elected twice. He is ineligible to be elected again.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 35 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yeah. The constitution also says anyone who starts a fucking insurrection is also ineligible and yet here we are.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RegalPotoo@lemmy.world 20 points 4 months ago (2 children)

If I had to put money on it, I'd guess they contest the legitimacy of the next election, and he just refuses to step down - can only be elected twice, but he's just there as a care taker until a proper election can happen

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] RegalPotoo@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Actually, reading the language again, I can absolutely see some shenanigans where he runs as VP for someone else who runs on a platform of "vote for me and I'll immediately resign and put Trump in charge again". It'd need the supreme court to decide if that "and" is exclusive or not, and given that half the court seems pretty happy to give up their principles of it suits their politics, I wouldn't be surprised if that worked

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cronenthal@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 4 months ago

It says "elected", but what is the president isn't elected? They will find a way, and with recent reality bending Supreme Court decisions or won't even be so hard.

Ok ok, but hear me out - what if we didn't have elections. No problem!

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] twistypencil@lemmy.world 27 points 4 months ago

Nope, that is a declaration of war

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 26 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Likely scenario:

They'll first try to get two thirds of both the senate and the congress, and to a constitution overhaul in the style of Hungary. If that fails, there's always the option for a martial-law, or just circumventing the whole of the constitution.

[–] astrsk@fedia.io 25 points 4 months ago (4 children)

To be honest, the most likely scenario in my mind is some form of war declaration or emergency, suspending elections has precedent during wartime.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago

A very handy use of the expansionalist dreams of GOP, but more likely is that Trump will just use the war on immigrants as an excuse to suspend elections.

[–] evidences@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Is there precedence for that in the US? I can't find an example of US elections being suspended during war time, even the 1964 election happened during a war period.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] VanillaFrosty@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Maybe make him speaker of the house then have a stand in prez and vp step down?

I know a vp has to have presidential eligibility to be elected, which Trump wouldn't have at the end of this term. But Im not aware of the same restriction on the speaker

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 15 points 4 months ago (3 children)

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

That's the wording. It looks pretty iron clad, if you care at all about the rule of law.

[–] GoatTnder@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The problem is that word "elected." It doesn't specifically exclude someone assuming the role of president through the line of succession.

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago (2 children)

No, but the "acted as" should technically cover it. Again it's meaningless if laws no longer apply lol.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 8 points 4 months ago (3 children)

That wording wouldn't prevent Trump from becoming Speaker of the House, and then becoming President for a third term through the line of succession.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MuskyMelon@lemmy.world 23 points 4 months ago

Time to 2A up to protect yourselves America. Only a copper jacketed hollow point between freedom and tyranny.

FYI I know nothing about ammo other than what I hear in movies or TV.

[–] answersplease77@lemmy.world 22 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Trump will be 79 in 2 months, at 83 he himself wont be around to run in 2028, but MAGA would still be there and that's what we should be fighting. I mean sadly and similarly Bernie Sanders wouldnt be around to run in 2028, but his movement is what we should be carrying

[–] taiyang@lemmy.world 22 points 4 months ago

Hey yo, while we're cutting jobs I heard the secret service costs the government billions and isn't even secret, we best tell Musk on X and use a thinky emoji to show how smart that observation is.

[–] nonentity@sh.itjust.works 14 points 4 months ago

A strategically deployed hamberder in the next 1000 days will ensure Trump is president for life.

[–] segabased@lemmy.zip 12 points 4 months ago

Time to really get to know our communities and our people in the military. The only justice imaginable coming from this is a coup in one form or another to oust them. Anyone in the military that is actually on board with this needs to be purged by the rank and file.

[–] Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee 11 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Third term?
Again with the Russian model - why not be more imaginative and declare yourself some new made-up dictator name (& just be a dictator, no terms, no red & blue, only polished golden ass), like something Borat would come up with.

His supreme big handedness of the Lord, the shitter of golden diarrhea, he who licks no domestic butts, the holy eternal MAGAer, the trumpest with the mostest absolute dumptruck ass, senior car salesmen.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Zier@fedia.io 11 points 4 months ago

He wants to be just like putin. He should be in jail!

[–] ech@lemm.ee 9 points 4 months ago

Anyone surprised at this is unqualified for political office.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 4 months ago

Maga operatives? Does he mean Gavin Newsom?

[–] CobraChicken3000@lemmy.ca 8 points 4 months ago

Fascist pricks are doing something fascistic, what?!

load more comments
view more: next ›