Summary
Despite the 22nd Amendment barring a third term (“No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice”), Trump continues to suggest he could run again, raising the idea at a Black History Month event and with Republican governors.
Legal experts say the Constitution is clear that he cannot run, though some supporters, including Rep. Andy Ogles and Steve Bannon, are pushing for a constitutional amendment or a 2028 campaign.
Meanwhile, Trump has expanded executive authority in his second term, drawing criticism for undermining congressional checks.
The Constitution barred him from running again after he incited a riot on the capitol. Yet here we are.
Forgive me if my faith in the Constitution is waning a bit.
The constitution is fine. The government has lost their will to enforce it, that’s the problem.
One difference is that he, specifically, wasn’t convicted of insurrection by the time ballots were being printed up. That’s why the Supreme Court could plausibly say that there was no basis for states to remove him from the ballot.
The clause on term limits is clear. It’s automatic, and there’s no interesting basis to challenge that. The Supreme Court would have to massively overreach to make that work. Will they do that? Maybe, but it’s not the same situation.
I have to say, it would be extremely funny if they changed the constitution and then Trump lost to Obama
No its so much more fucked than that. It’s literally god emperor language.
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-third-term-constitutional-amendment-andy-ogles-2025020
The wording of Ogles’ amendment proposal suggests that previous consecutive two-term presidents, such as Barack Obama or George W. Bush, would not be allowed to run for a third term.
Funnily enough, the same thing happened with Putin in Russia
The Dems should call his bluff and propose a constitutional amendment allowing three terms, perhaps under the condition that sitting presidents must win an open primary to be eligible for a second or third nomination.
FDR had three terms, plus a few months of a fourth term.
IMHO, the bigger issue is not having three terms, but the fact that sitting presidents can get the nomination without winning a primary. This practice removes an important opportunity to replace them.
The parties aren’t part of the government and can make their own rules on how they choose a candidate. All that’s required to run for president is getting enough signatures and filing the right paperwork. Being a party’s chosen candidate makes that a lot easier, but anyone can do it.
Since we are talking constitutional amendments, anything can be added as a requirement.
The way things currently work are not a restriction.
I honestly think we should have fewer roadblocks to running for national office, not more. Introduce an amendment that candidates have to be primaried and now only members of a party can run for president, rather than anyone who gets enough support. That doesn’t seem like a step forward to me.
In what world could someone who is already elected president not arrange some kind of democratic primary for their second and third terms?
You could also abolish the whole primary process and go for a French two-stage election.
Anyway, sky’s the limit for finding a new system.
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.
Oh yeah, he 100% should be disqualified for insurrection. However, a felony is not treason.
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.
A sane, rational adult would understand any system that relies on them being sane and rational is a poorly made system
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.
Alaska already has ranked choice voting
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’?
What asteroid? I haven’t heard
There’s no rush, it wouldn’t hit for 8 years I think. I mean, there are more pressing problems lol
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
If we ever wrest control back from these ghouls, there are a shit-ton of things that need codifying.
While this is absolutely true, it is not a good idea to make felony conviction a disqualification from holding office. Look at who’s controlling DoJ right now, and there are plenty of states that will follow that lead. Making it so that a felony conviction disqualifies a person from holding office is just a roadmap for corruption to follow in order to maintain control.
Yeah well, the Constitution says a lot of things. However, it’s fairly clear a large segment of the American population doesn’t care what the Constitution says as long as it’s their team in power.
Exactly, they’re going to say the courts are just against him, or something, and then kick off.
And I would say:
Yes, the courts are against him on that because it’s fucking clear that our founders never wanted a king or authoritarian in charge and two terms is more than enough and already set.
The Republican Third Term Project is pushing this hard. They’re at CPAC drumming up support. I think the language is only specific to Trump though, so no other past president would be able to run again. It’s something like a president that has not served 2 consecutive terms.
Also, Trump doesn’t care about the constitution and neither do just about every GOP in office. They may say publicly that he can’t do it or whatever, but if it comes down to it, they would vote for it.
Criminals aren’t allowed to run for president either. Here we are.
I’d vote for Debs
According to the Supreme Court of the United States of America, Jefferson Davis and General Robert E. Lee are both eligible for the office of the United States of America (if they were still alive at least).
Of course criminals are allowed to run for president
wrong, it’s only individual states that prohibit felons from voting or running for office.
Who’s gonna stop him from running for or taking office for a third time? The Democrats? Are they gonna write a strongly worded letter? The Supreme Court? Do they have anyone with guns who will listen to them?
He’ll be SLaMmeD in that strongly worded letter, they’ll pat themselves on the back for a job well done, then run another candidate without a primary.
It says elected. He has no intention of having another election.
Of course he’ll run and of course he’ll win and og course he’ll just ignore the laws about it and of course nobody is going to stop him
I can’t see him still being alive by then. He’s going to have a stroke or coronary before then.
Or some other mysterious 3rd option
Imagine if a MacDonald’s worker on minimum wage slipped something in his slimeburger.
We were all hoping for that last time and look where we are now. …
8 years of horrible lifestyle later.
Barred? By whom? Really, when will the states wake up and figure out there is no “adult” in the wings that will enforce norms.
The constitution is like the laws of physics; god will enforce it. If not god then perhaps ligma.
American exceptionalism is so stupid strong that I can actually see people thinking that.
Any time Trump jokes, it’s the camel’s nose under the tent.
I’ve never heard that phrase before that’s an excellent phrase.
Can you enlighten me? I don’t understand the phrase.
Camels, much like dogs, cats, and other domesticated animals, are constantly pushing their boundaries. The phrase “a camel’s nose under the tent” is indicative of a camel that is attempting to find a way inside the tent so that they may eat the, most likely, food that has captured their attention with its scent.
This would be applicable to the Drumpf administration because they are, much like the camel, using a method of “throw everything at the wall and see what sticks,” as well as a method of overwhelming the media with birdshot. Namely, if you’re creating 50 stories a day, and doing 50 things a day, then the media and the government can’t keep up.
Again similar to our camel that has enough strength to tip the tent over, and create a royal mess, in its attempt to get in.
Edit: First time I have heard the phrase as well,.but that is the meaning I would take from context.
I looked it up when I saw it, it seems like it comes from a fable with a similar moral to “If You Give a Mouse a Cookie”
A camel sticks his nose under the edge of a tent for warmth, it’s owner (or a stranger w/e) allows it to out of kindness. Then the camel slowly worms it’s entire body in the tent and refuses to budge.
It’s a slippery slope parable.
In a sane society Trump should be in prison.
I also had no idea. This is what I found.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camel’s_nose
The camel’s nose is a metaphor for a situation where the permitting of a small, seemingly innocuous act will open the door for larger, clearly undesirable actions.
Yeah, I don’t think he’s capable of an actual joke. I’m a big fan of this analysis…. https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/writer-perfectly-breaks-down-why-brits-dont-like-donald-trump-388956/
He’s gonna run anyways. Mark my words. He can’t leave office or he’s fucked. The constitution is nothing more than toilet paper at this point, if no one is going to stand up for it.
Ideally, in the near future he will undergo some sort of transformation that would render a third term a physical impossibility rather than a legal one.
I call that “God’s Ultimate Recall Vote”
Decent chance he’ll croak before the end of his term. Or maybe that’s just wishful thinking on my part.
Then we get Captain Shortpants
Wait until he learns about FDR and his third and fourth terms. That’s what he’ll use as his reasoning.
Obama - Return of the Jedi
There is absolutely nothing barring Trump from running for a third term.
The Supreme Court literally just hand-waved away another Constitutional amendment that should have barred Trump from running for a 2nd term, let alone a third. And they basically did it on the legal precedent of “because fuck you, that’s why.” All 3 branches of government have completely ignored the blatant constitutional violations he’s committed since taking office. There’s absolutely nothing stopping the Supreme Court from just striking down another constitutional amendment because hey why not and letting the guy run as often as he wants.
And remember, we even had one state legislator asking why we even have elections instead of just handing the votes to Trump…
There was a little kernel of sanity behind that ruling, though. Absent a clear conviction for a crime that smells like insurrection, who gets to decide what insurrection means? I remember that there was a lot of talk of the “insurrection at the border” at the same time the ruling was being considered, as well as describing migrants as “military-age men”. I am positive that if the SC let Colorado take Trump off the ballot, Texas would have taken Biden off based on some bullshit theory that he was instigating a foreign invasion of migrants.
The language behind a third Presidential term is much, much clearer. The plain text of the amendment bars it, and if Trump decides to run again, several states will declare him ineligible on the spot. That will go to the SC, too. We’ll see what happens then.
There was a little kernel of sanity behind that ruling, though. Absent a clear conviction for a crime that smells like insurrection,
The House of Representatives, by a majority vote, found that Donald Trump engaged in insurrection and impeached him for this after January 6th. The Senate failed to vote to remove him from office, but this does not change the fact that he was found to have engaged in insurrection by the House of Representatives.
who gets to decide what insurrection means?
The House of Representatives already did.
Texas would have taken Biden off based on some bullshit theory that he was instigating a foreign invasion of migrants.
And when either the House of Representatives votes to impeach him for it, then he can be removed from the ballot as well. They tried, and failed. Repeatedly.
And if the courts just randomly decide that Biden’s actions constituted an insurrection, we have much bigger problems to deal with, as the courts at that point can just declare anything they want as an insurrection, including political dissent.
The language behind a third Presidential term is much, much clearer. The plain text of the amendment bars it
Going based on the “kernel of sanity” thing, the argument is that it was meant to bar more than two consecutive terms, and was not meant to bar non-consecutive terms. The argument is that those who wrote the amendment knew the importance of being specific, and if they wanted to bar non-consecutive terms, they’d have specifically said as much.
Unfortunately, most people don’t interpret the impeachment the way you do. They view the fact that he didn’t get thrown out of office as more of an acquittal, really. Although impeachment is a political process and not a judicial one, the impeachment itself in the House is more akin to an indictment while the trial in the Senate is meant to mirror a jury trial.
I’m a Brit so what do I know? But I can see him taking a leaf out of Putin’s playbook and running as VP to a family member running for President, possibly Eric. Then he’ll still be in control.
the constitution also directly bars that, but, it bars a lot of what Trump’s already done in the last month
The bad news is that we’ve (the sane, the empathetic, the introspective, the curious) already lost what was America. Trump’s reelection is more like the rimshot following the actual punchline. So that battle is lost. It’s painful but we can’t dwell on it like a dog licking a hot spot. The good news is a new battle is brewing. I have no doubt that the current state of the government is unsustainable, wether by design or through incompetence. It’s a near certainty that major calamity is on the horizon. Illness, war, terrorism, climate, social upheaval, something catastrophic will happen. It is going to happen and it will demand leadership and governance to overcome, and the fourth reich will not be capable of rising to the occasion. They will botch it, and the nation will be shattered. Historic levels of national reorganization will need to occur. Implied rules will need to be made explicit. This is where the next fight really is. They got to play offense for as long as democrats were a boogie man. Well, they hold all the cards now, so they will be soley to blame for the trainwreck. They will try to weasel out of it, but we can’t let them. We need to keep them cornered, and we need to be ready to snatch back the tiller when the rough seas knock that fat bastard down onto the fucking deck. Then we need to bust out the plank and throw a going away party for his whole rogues gallery. Then we need to find shore again and fix our damaged ship.
america never was America to me
You’re talking like America as an institution will survive. It probably won’t. A new plague is already brewing and we have an idiot actively fighting against healthcare in charge of healthcare. The president is attempting to start multiple wars and isolating us from all allies. They’ve gutted the programs put in place to prevent the next major terrorist organization from forming. They’re taking active steps to make climate change less survivable even as its effects are already here. Socially we’ve been degenerating for years, Obama was a pretty lie about our ability to improve as a society. Not even to mention the economy is going to collapse.
America is hitting empire ending issues and half of them are being actively caused by the leader of the empire!
Quite the opposite. I’m saying America is over and soon something new will be built in it’s place. And it’s up to us to make sure it is an improvement over what it replaces.
When everything is destroyed how will you stop Russia or China invading?
Why would they physically invade when they’re already extracting what they want from us remotely? They’ll no sooner physically invade our land than a farmer would invade the barn where they keep their cattle. Why take by force what you are being freely given?
And as a side note, I am able to fix very little, but we stand a fighting chance to fix a great deal more together.
They invade to cement their control, I guess, not just to grab resources. If their candidate could lose the election, they would lose everything. I think this is all destabilisation and manipulation so that we’re weaker when they do invade and some people would even welcome them as rescuers. I’m not saying it will be tomorrow but they’re destroying America very quickly and systematically. They’re trying to destroy the west and democracy entirely.
The 22nd amendment, the one that bars him from running for a third presidential term, also bars him from running as a future VP. Legally he could be speaker of the house, or another high ranking unelected official, but he’s not inclined to follow laws anyway. Before Musk I would have said he wouldn’t want to be 2nd-in-power, so I would have thought having one of his sons hold a higher office than him wouldn’t happen. Everything is upside down now, so who knows what will happen
There’s an interesting, although ultimately flawed, argument that the 22nd says that a person who’s ineligible to hold the office of president can’t be VP, and that a person can only be elected to two full terms.
It’s an interesting argument that he’s not ineligible to hold office, so he could be VP despite not being able to be elected.It’s ultimately flawed because the intent of the amendment was clear, and if we’re working around it to that extent we’re really sort of done with the law anyway.
He’s not in control. He plays golf, tweets angrily, eats hamberders, watches tv, and yells at crowds and probably clouds.
The billionaires behind him are in charge.
https://www.vcinfodocs.com/venture-capital-and-trump
https://www.vcinfodocs.com/venture-capital-extremism
https://www.vcinfodocs.com/day-one-of-venture-capital-takeover
