509
Barred from running for a third term, Trump keeps talking about it
(www.usatoday.com)
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 22 Feb 2025
509 points (100.0% liked)
politics
30908 readers
1578 users here now
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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
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
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.
The treason I'm referring to is the attempted coup & incitement of insurrection of course...
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.
Hence, the sane rational adults, and the idyllic world bit
A sane, rational adult would understand any system that relies on them being sane and rational is a poorly made system
idyllic world
People don't fucking read
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
And if you, and potentially multiple family members, don't pass a background check... you still qualify!