• tabarnaski@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    18 hours ago

    In 2016 I thought That’s it, the US is headed for a civil war 2.0 in the next 10 years. I don’t believe that now because no one seems to be doing anything to resist this destruction of democracy by the silicon valley billionaires.

    Move fast and break things will be easy for them if nobody even tries to slow them down.

    • x00z@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Yeah I think playing it slow is part of the strategy.

      You can’t just take ownership of a country, you need to make people want to give it to you.

    • inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      17 hours ago

      I guessed back when the patriot act was signed after 9/11 that we’d have a fascist dictatorship by 2025. Well….

      I really wish my ability to see patterns applied to seeing winning lottery numbers :(

    • eldavi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      17 hours ago

      you were too early in your predictions: trump is going to be pushed out in favor of vance and musk is going to vp.

      • inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Assuming they don’t throw away the constitution that their base likes to jerk off too, how would musk qualify? He’s not American born. That and being over 35 are pretty much the only requirements.

        • TheRedSpade@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Trump doesn’t qualify either. Their base only cares about the 1st amendment (when it’s their speech) and the 2nd when it comes to owning guns (to hell with the “well regulated” bit). They don’t even know what any other parts of the constitution say.

          • inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 hours ago

            It says nothing about being a felon 🤷🏻‍♀️

            Also learn to not shit on the second amendment:

            Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary - Karl Marx

              • inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                4 hours ago

                Trump was never found guilty of insurrection because the biden admin slow walked the case, and then he won the presidency, ending it for good.

        • eldavi@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          17 hours ago

          they won’t throw away the constitution; they’ll modify it and a whole range of laws and rules that will enable musk and a bunch of other things that will become permanent from now on.

          • inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            16 hours ago

            Can’t modify the constitution without a convention, a constitutional convention needs 2/3 of the states to agree to the changes IIRC, that’s why there hasn’t been an amendment passed in a very long time.

            Assuming they follow the rule of law, which they likely won’t.

            • eldavi@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              16 hours ago

              that’s project 2025’s primary stated goal and it looks realistic right now since republicans already have the needful majorities in levers of government in all of the branches and the states.

              the equal rights amendment was passed in 2020; so it’s definitely possible.

              • inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                16 hours ago

                I’m pretty damn cynical but I’d be surprised if they could pull of a constitutional convention.

                I actually think it’s more likely my state would secede than a constitutional convention being successful. Especially if we end up in a tariff war with Canada and Quebec hydro shuts off power to us…

                • eldavi@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  16 hours ago

                  my state would secede than a constitutional convention being successful

                  that’s both our only hope and the mostly likely avenue of attack since we’re on track be only 3 states away (at best) from republican control in 2026.

                  the divide between the republican and democrat states is going to mirror the presidential election electoral college if the democrats don’t get their act together and i’m pessimistic that they will since the party’s leadership continues to insist that they lost because they went too woke and doubled down when they blocked aoc from the oversight committee position a couple of days ago.

  • exothermic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    What if muskrat becomes Speaker of the House and trump and vance both resign? Is that a legal loophole to get a non-native (naturalized) US citizen into the presidency?

    • runner_g@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I’m pretty sure they’d go to the next eligible person in line, which is the present pro tempore of the senate

  • Infamousblt [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I’m for it for one simple reason: the sooner folks realize that our entire “democracy” is a complete sham gussied up as reality TV the sooner folks might start caring enough to do something about it

        • Malgas@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Secretary of State is #4, and that didn’t stop Madeline Albright from holding that position during the Clinton years. I believe the accepted solution is that the succession just skips over anyone who is ineligible.

        • inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          16 hours ago

          I’m aware of that, I’m not aware that they’re required to be American born, it would be an interesting constitutional question if the president and VP died and the speaker of the house wasn’t American born.

          Edit - looking into it further, I don’t see the same qualifications being required as president and vp. For example, one only has to be 25 and up to be speaker of the house, yet one has to be 35 for president or vp. So again, I wonder if they elected a 25 year old as speaker and then a plane crashed with the president and vp on board (not possible they don’t fly together but let’s play pretend) I wonder if the speaker would be promoted to president to maintain continuity of government or if they’d be passed over to whoever’s fourth in line that meets qualifications.

          • puttputt@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            16 hours ago

            They would just be removed from the line up succession. We’ve had cabinet members who were ineligible for the presidency, and they were just not considered as in the line of succession, even though they otherwise would be.

            Edit: here’s the text of the Presidential Succession Act of 1947

            (b) If, at the time when under subsection (a) a Speaker is to begin the discharge of the powers and duties of the office of President, there is no Speaker, or the Speaker fails to qualify as Acting President, then the President pro tempore of the Senate shall, upon his resignation as President pro tempore and as Senator, act as President.

            Note that it explicitly mentions the Speaker failing to qualify for the presidency

    • maniclucky@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Only applies to the presidency. In the case of succession, he’d get skipped. Assuming we still care about the Constitution by then.

      • TheRedSpade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Assuming we still care about the Constitution by then.

        Considering we elected someone who’s constitutionally disqualified, I’m thinking that ship has sailed.

  • HumongousChungus [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    I’m not surprised by the effort, but I am surprised that this is technically allowed. You’d think the Dems would have just made the CIA director Speaker or Senate VP instead of doing it through Nancy and Schumer. Must be an optics thing.

    • TheRedSpade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      The right didn’t create the term “woke”. They just changed the meaning to anything they don’t like.

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Hmm, there may be a long game going on here. Making Elon the Speaker is total nonsense, of course. But if enough Republicans insist, and we have another protracted Speaker battle, it may go past Jan 6, when the Electoral Votes are counted. Can they even be counted if there is no Speaker to convene the House? If they are not counted, it goes to a contingent election. But can there even be a contingent election in the House if there is no Speaker?

    Keep this up long enough, and we end up with President Vance. Boy, will that make Trump upset. All his cases that are “on hold” start up again. And the new President starts his immigration crackdown with one very visible illegal immigrant who broke the rules when he came here…