politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
On the one hand, I understand why people think SCOTUS will rule in Trump's favor.
On the other hand, they did NOT rule for the Independendent State Legislature theory. Which I think people were surprised about. It was sold as a necessary step for our descent into true minority GOP rule. And SCOTUS didn't accept it.
Why would they miss a chance to cement that lever of GOP rule and then take this one? Isn't SCOTUS the exact conservative group that have ZERO incentive to bow down to Trump? Perhaps in fear of their own lives? But wouldn't the knowledge of their own hostage situation mean they would want to fight this somehow?
This is the GOPs opportunity to find it's way out of the Trump Wilderness and you'd think the oligarchs, if they really do own the judges, would discard Trump and try again in 2028.
Unless of course Kavanaugh et al really are directly being blackmailed by Trump. But then again, why didn't they accept the ISL theory when we all thought they would?
I would add to this... I'm not convinced they would lose in 2024. If they kept Trump off the ballot, Haley could naturally step in and say she would pardon Trump (wouldn't get him reinstated or anything really, but I don't think his supporters would read past "pardon").
Then all of the sudden you might actually get a revved up MAGA crowd behind someone like Haley, who appeals way more to the center.
It's not far fetched that she could give Biden a hard time, particularly now that they'd play the age card as much as possible. I've been saying this from the beginning... This is the Trump off-ramp in a way that doesn't damage any elected officials. They can all be outraged and angry publicly, and they fits their narrative very nicely.
If Trump gets kicked off the ballot, the road for Democrats in 2024 gets harder, not easier, in my opinion.
Trump croaking would be the best thing that could happen for the GOP establishment (the ones that remain anwyays). Being disqualified before super Tuesday is the second best outcome for them.
I disagree. Trump will run as an independent if he's disqualified, and he'll split the fascist vote the Haley. Of course votes for him won't count, but they'll still be votes Haley doesn't get.
.... He can't run at all if he's kicked off the ballot.
And he won't rally people against Haley or she'll pull the "I Won't Pardon You" card.
Trump always operates in his own selfish best interest. And his interest will quickly become do what he can to get Haley elected. It'll be his only out.
He can do all the usual things candidates do when they campaign. The only difference is his name won't be on the ballot. That won't stop his cult from attempting a write-in campaign.
I disagree. Trump will run as an independent if he's disqualified, and he'll split the fascist vote the Haley. Of course votes for him won't count, but they'll still be votes Haley doesn't get.
I don't really know the conservative Justices' true situation as far as bribery, kompromat, activism, or whatever the hell else. They have made some rulings that don't track with being totally bought and paid for by pro Trump entities and willing to cavalierly burn it all down in Trump's service.
Actually, I get the impression they are unwilling to make rulings that will result in mass legal chaos, such as ruling in favor of the Independent State Legislature Doctrine argument they recently all but nullified.
Or another example, that Presidents and former Presidents are immune from prosecution which would toss many, many rulings over a wide span of time into the trash can and basically enable any president, not just Trump, to do whatever the fuck they wanted while simultaneously kneecapping the judiciary. (I'm assuming here that they don't believe Trump is guaranteed to become president for life).
My guess is that they will rule in such a way that doesn't break all kinds of things, make them look like a laughingstock, and also provide other states with a slam dunk to remove Trump from their ballots.
They will consider the argument of CO SC breaking Colorado law outside their jurisdiction (to avoid breaking everything), support the ruling that President is an officer of the US (to avoid looking like absolute clowns and also breaking everything). Beyond that idk.