this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
678 points (100.0% liked)

politics

22200 readers
3514 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
(page 2) 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

Ah yes now it’s time for a “special 3 days operation” in Canada.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago

Eh, "should" this, "supposed to" that, whatever.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (8 children)

i'm going to take a counter argument here. the united states should annex canada and buy greenland.

why?

because the population of canada is more than california.

because there are 48 democratic senators.

because canada and denmark are both more left leaning than california is.

see where i'm going here? canada and greenland gives dems enough people to force through their agenda through the house and senate. and with enough backlash there's probably going to be a lot of gop senators who aren't going to be senators in 2026, probably enough to hit 69 which would be the minimum to remove trump from office. probably enough to impeach that little lickspittle vance too. and then enough votes for a democratic president (since the house would be run by democrats, 3rd in succession is the speaker of the house) to sign bills giving canada it's "independance" and return greenland to denmark.

if trump wants it that badly, then lets give it to him.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago

So you want to forcefully exploit people in other nations for your own benefit too, just in a different way to Trump.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago

Chances are that if the lonnie and donnie show annex Canada that the idea of free and fair elections would be over. Or, if they were to somehow come out of such a scenario with free and fair elections, they do something to rig Canada so any progressive majority would be blunted (just like it is already) by the Electoral College.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 57 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (17 children)

25th Amendment needs to start with the Vice President, so we know that's not going to happen:

Section 4

Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago

Even if the VP started it the president can still override them unless unconscious/in a coma.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Why not? We all know Vance is pretending for the position. If he sees a real shot, he might take it.

Nobody likes Trump as a person. They're all just grifting.

The trick is getting enough to turn at once, and getting them all to know that there's enough. A dumb one might rat it out because of greed, but they should know that doesn't work. If they're in that position, there's no further loyalty rewards. The best they can hope for is avoiding retribution, and that's not even guaranteed.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (2 children)

The reason he picked Vance is because he knew there was no resistance there, he learned from Pence.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago

Vance is much less of a zombie than Pence. He's actively evil, fanatical and not stupid.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

But he's an idiot, and if Vance sees a legit opening he might jump at it.

"I go back and forth between thinking Trump is a cynical asshole like Nixon who wouldn't be that bad (and might even prove useful) or that he's America's Hitler," he wrote privately to an associate on Facebook in 2016.

In another 2016 interview about his book, Vance told a reporter that, although his background would have made him a natural Trump supporter, “the reason, ultimately, that I am not … is because I think that (Trump) is the most-raw expression of a massive finger pointed at other people.”

load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›