55
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2025
55 points (92.3% liked)
Asklemmy
44272 readers
827 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
10%.
Here are all the ways that doesn't happen:
These things have a less than 1% chance:
The bird flu is starting to look like it could be a serious threat. Given that he already attempted an insurrection once, I wouldn't put it past him to intentionally turn it into another pandemic, then generously decide that this time he's going to take it seriously and lock everything down in 2028 (while simultaneously banning all states from using mail-in ballots).
Would be difficult for him to do so via any legal means. Each individual States run elections. They are not federally run, even for federal offices per the US constitution
Election days are similarly set by the US constitution
The bar to change that is quite high with 2/3 of congress + 3/4 of state legislatures to ratify. And while Supreme Court is insane, they did recently ruled 6-3 against the insane independent state legislature theory (which would have meant even state courts could not rule on anything election related) which is related to the exact piece of the constitution
For this one, it also depends on how the Supreme Court rules on the 12th amendment. That amendment states that anyone who is unqualified to be president is likewise unqualified to be vice president, but there is some uncertainty as to whether or not it only applies to people unqualified to be president or if it includes people unqualified to run as president.
I'd say 90% chance the conservative-stacked Supreme Court side with Trump because the conservative justices are originalists and the 12th's interaction with the 22nd was not intended when the 12th was written, but 10% chance they decide he's unqualified to be Vice President so as to keep the door closed for Dems who might try the same thing.
It's the wording of the 22nd amendment that makes this a possible outcome (emphasis added):
It could have said "no person shall serve as president for more than two terms" or similar wording, but it does not. I agree with you that conservative justices are likely to use this interpretation.