I guess we’ll find out if they are lies here in 2028.
Yeah, but I heard it from the right, who said the Democrats were trying to circumvent the Constitution and that it was a bad thing. Now the Republicans, and Trump himself. Are saying the same thing about Trump and that it would be a* good* thing!
Ah. So what you didn’t hear about was how Reagan was going to use Rex-84 to declare martial law and cancel the election. Or how Dubya was going to use terrorism to declare martial law and cancel the election. Or how Trump was going to use covid to declare martial law and cancel the election.
The only president in my lifetime who I don’t know of there being election conspiracy theories about was Papa Bush, presumably because even the craziest cranks the left had to offer couldn’t imagine him wanting to be a dictator. Trump’s the only one I know of who ever actually suggested postponing (not cancelling, just postponing) an election, and everyone including his toadies completely blew it off because everyone understands that that’s not something a president can do.
On a smaller scale, Mayor of America, Mayor “Four Seasons Total Landscaping” Giuliani,who had wisely stored a shitload of fuel in WTC 7 as it was his “bunker”, floated the idea that the mayoral elections could be postponed but Bloomberg emphatically said “No”.
So even if Trump doesn’t feel like getting his fat-ass out of the White House only because several states will be ready to send him directly to jail and not pay him $200, he may choose to be a “War-time President” and somewhere in the Constitution as interpreted by SCOTUS it must say he has to remain. If not, martial law works too. “The Art of being a Junta en Estados Unidos”
While I agree with you politically, I can not think of another poster on this site who has been so spectacularly wrong about EVERYTHING. And I mean EVERYTHING.
Every time you post that something can’t happen I gird myself, because at this point it’s almost guaranteeing that it most certainly will… Maybe you should stop for a breather?
Lest we forget, Trump did win the popular vote this time. IMHO the only way Democrats would “get anything out of the deal” is if Obama agreed to run against Trump in this hypothetical 2028 election with no 22nd amendment.
But he lost it the first two times, so we don’t have to bring in Obama to beat him there.
Getting rid of the Electoral College would be a massive thing to get from the deal. Without it, Al Gore would have won in 2000 and Hillary in 2016. No telling how many times in the future the D candidate will win the popular vote but lose the EC.
I’ll admit when I was wrong. I was wrong that Clinton would win in '16 and Harris in '24. I was wrong that Trump wouldn’t pardon the 1/6ers. I was wrong in that I thought he’d have been 25thed by now.
On the other hand, I was (unfortunately) right in that Biden dropping out would mean Trump would win. And I was right when several posters declared that the beginning of Trump’s 2nd term would mean immediate martial law, the shutting down of this board and our arrests, nationwide rollback of gay rights, and a slew of other doomsday prophecies.
If you haven’t read my MPSIMS thread about the Abramelin operation you’ll be happy to know that starting the day after Easter I won’t be posting for six months.
It sounds like you were right about half of the time on a bunch of 50/50 propositions.
So you thought Harris would win, and you also thought Trump would win.
You batted .500 on the 2024 election.
So…you predicted both that Biden dropping out would cause Trump to win, AND that when Biden dropped out and Harris took his place, Harris would win? How does that work?
I changed my mind when I saw how quickly Harris was accepted as the prospective nominee. In retrospect my first prediction was correct.
Sure. All my predictions are also correct when I predict all possible outcomes of a situation, then choose the correct one after the fact.
Good luck on the Abramelin ritual.
Half of the Internet seems convinced that Trump might “cancel elections” in 2026 and 2028. However, I for one seem to be at a loss to determine exactly how this is possible, especially as the terms of all members of the House and one-third of the Senate end on January 3, 2027.
I hope, for his sake, that he doesn’t make the same mistake that the Shah of Iran and Ferdinand Marcos seemed to make: assume, “Don’t worry; the Army is on our side!”
Autocrats don’t cancel elections. Elections give the fig leaf of legitimacy.
They just fix them.
Which brings us back to the OP. Yes, Trump will use whatever fig leaf (the word “elected” most one such example of a “plausible” scheme) and run again, assuming he’s still alive, and dare any states to keep him off the ballot. Which, equally IMHO, after Colorado’s failed effort, they will not be successful at. Given the rate at which he is replacing anyone who could stand up to him, including by pardoning those who would take action on his behalf, it’s extremely likely that he’d get the win, even if he had to accept another slate of false electors, which I believe Vance would do in a heartbeat.
Our best chance of preventing this is a landslide in the mid-terms, but despite a lot of distress at tariffs, his base is extremely happy with the very loud, very visible deportations and the image that Trump is getting one over on those nations that have been “cheating” us.
Without Biden dropping out, Trump beats him in a landslide following that disaster of the early debate. At least Harris made the election competitive.
Moderating:
Let’s keep our attention on how term limits may or may not apply to a future election, rather than the sidetrack we’ve stepped on a few times now about the last election. Not directed at any one poster, just avoiding the drift.