-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Is there any potential loophole Trump can use to stay in power?
- Thread starter fanboi
- Start date
The fear is what happens if he declares he still has power and people just follow. Again, trump is such a black hole of charisma that it wont happen. But lets stop pretending that the law will stop someone powerfull and motivated enough.
January 20, 2021 comes and goes, and Trump refuses to leave the White House. Some parts of the government continue to listen to him, others are silent until they get some certainty.
What exactly is the mechanism to forcibly remove him? Be as specific as possible.
I agree, this thread is an example of American exceptionalism. Plenty of counties have fallen when a leader refuses to recognize an election loss.
The military are conditioned to obey whoever the president is... and in that scenario, it wouldn't be Trump at noon January 20.
They've also been pretty resistant toward some of the things he's ordered, so I doubt he's earned much loyalty.
The Senate has nothing to do with certifying the electoral college results. The House, which will likely be Democratic, controls that function.
The Senate also can't prevent an automatic transfer of power on January 20.
And what if congress majority would still call him president?
He isn't emperor. He doesn't get to just declare things. When his presidency is over, it is over. And who do you think these people who would just follow that even are, to the point where it would matter?
Authoritarian figures have a history of creating their own loopholes. Hopefully the American system is strong enough to prevent that. There's a lot of uncodified gentlemen's agreement bullshit in the government as I've found out the last few years but I don't know of a loophole for the constitutional amendment.
Last I heard, grunts tend to be more pro-Trump than brass. In the event of a power grab/soft coup, I expect the military to remain neutral.
Cops though, that's another matter entirely.
About 40% of American voters and various local governments who'll have to deal with the fallout.
Also his administration might just stay in the office unless they're moved by force.
1. The Democrats will still control the House, most likely.
2. Separation of powers. The Congress has nothing to do with the transfer of presidential power beyond certifying the electoral college results.
The government CAN'T listen to him anymore at that point. He is no longer president and secret service would remove him.
I mean watching the Cohen hearing was an eye opener how far R would go.
The guys a lying weasel, a toad. A cock roach who will do whatever it takes to get his way, including throwing his own kids under the bus if it comes to it.
The second he's out he's done for. No chance he's letting it come to that.
Expect orange fireworks with a residue of turd
The second he's out he's done for. No chance he's letting it come to that.
Expect orange fireworks with a residue of turd
US Marines politely escort him from the premises.
Or, probably not, but there's nothing special about the white house. President Kasich or whoever just conducts his administration out of the Capitol building while people try to get Trump to leave peacefully. Meanwhile, the military and civil service no longer follow Trump's orders because Trump isn't the president.
Trump just refusing to abdicate is a pretty unlikely scenario, anyway. Far more likely is a contested election, or an election made contested by Russian or Republican malfeasance, that casts doubt as to the legitimate result of the election. I'm really not sure what would happen then. But it can only work by sowing doubt as to the result of the election, not just by Trump deciding he's going to ignore it.
Let's say, theoretically, R gain both senate and house but lose presidency (I believe this is possible right?), then both bodies adheres to a trump declaration of voter fraud etc.
They have a history of finding obscure loopholes so I'm sure they'd be able to find something about how a woman can't be president or something.
You say this like Republicans and the Republicans on the SC care about the rule of law.
Possible but unlikely. The areas that swung against Republicans in the House races last year are not likely to swing back with Trump on the ballot... since he caused them to trend Democratic in the first place!
The Senate might stay Republican even if a Democrat wins, but the House will likely remain Democratic
It isn't like the new president get sworn in in public or anything.
The results would be certified in nov, before a new Congress takes office.
The results would be certified in nov, before a new Congress takes office.
Basically the thought process from some folks that fear this scenario is - what if Trump waves his little hand, says he isn't leaving and is still president, and everyone is like "oh ok, rad".
Seriously, I get Trump scares people (especially outsiders who don't get how the presidency works), but this fear is so far down on the list of absurdities, it shouldn't even register.
Seriously, I get Trump scares people (especially outsiders who don't get how the presidency works), but this fear is so far down on the list of absurdities, it shouldn't even register.
Thanks.
Let say my theory goes through, red wave, and they agree with trump, how would such a matter be solved?
Exactly. The inaugural ceremony is just a nicety. Power transfers automatically at noon on January 20 per the Constitution. Nothing stops it.
I think a big problem in threads like this is... that a lot of the people posting aren't American.
No, that's not American exceptionalism. I'm just observing that lot of them don't fully understand how our government works.
Yes. Absolutely there is. I'm not sure why everyone is pretending it's impossible.
The Constitution has been amended 27 times, and the means by which it can be amended are the same now as they were then. The only thing holding back a Constitutional Amendment saying "Donald Trump is President for life" is the fact that, as far as we can tell, no one in either House of Congress supports it. But, I mean, the legal path is there.
We're still waaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyy far away from that ever happening. I'm not worried about the possibility as of now, and neither should you. But the notion that laws can save us from people who want to seize power is a silly idea to hold on to. Those in powers get to decide what's legal, so their powers are only constrained by the degree to which the different powerful people have choose to constrain each other.
The Constitution has been amended 27 times, and the means by which it can be amended are the same now as they were then. The only thing holding back a Constitutional Amendment saying "Donald Trump is President for life" is the fact that, as far as we can tell, no one in either House of Congress supports it. But, I mean, the legal path is there.
We're still waaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyy far away from that ever happening. I'm not worried about the possibility as of now, and neither should you. But the notion that laws can save us from people who want to seize power is a silly idea to hold on to. Those in powers get to decide what's legal, so their powers are only constrained by the degree to which the different powerful people have choose to constrain each other.
Anyone dismissing the idea that the United States of America is vulnerable to falling into a dictatorship is kidding themselves. The past two years should be evidence enough for that.
However, I do have confidence that Trump doesn't have the sway within the military and/or police forces to execute on a power grab, which is really the only way he could extend his stay in power.
However, I do have confidence that Trump doesn't have the sway within the military and/or police forces to execute on a power grab, which is really the only way he could extend his stay in power.
I mean, the only thing holding back any amendment is the fact that 2/3 of each chamber of Congress have to agree to it, after which it must be ratified by 2/3 of state legislatures.
An amendment wouldn't be a danger even if Republicans controlled the House and Senate, nor would anything be approved in 2/3 of state legislatures because there are too many solid red/blue states.
You mean the last two years in which a racist, hateful yet incompetent president has been checked by the courts, couldn't get through a lot of his agenda even with a Congress controlled by his own party, has inspired no loyalty beyond his mouthbreathing base, fucks up everything he touches, and then was so unpopular he caused his party to lose 40 seats in the midterms by the largest popular vote margin on record?
IN fairness, a lot of posts are based on the idea that the government could stop working and laws just be ignored. BUt that's highly unlikely since Trump has not gained complete loyalty over the military or secret service so he doesn't have the ability to just ignore the law on a whim
States would just constitutional convention the fuck out of that amendment.
Agreed. As I said, in no way do I think this is anything we need to worry about. I'm just saying the legal path is there.
In the same way that the legal path exists to do almost anything, since laws are defined by people. The legal path to Trump being dictator for life is the same as the legal path to make murder legal. All you need is enough people who want it to happen, working in concert to change the legal system to allow it.
A constitutional convention can't occur unless called for by 2/3 of state legislatures.
Again, too many solid red/blue states. It won't happen.
For the record, I don't see this happening given how incompetent Trump is and how little support he has. But someone smarter and more competent just like him can crop up someday.
You're naive if you think Republicans actually care about what is supposed to happen according to law. If there was a way they could get away with something like this to stay in power indefinitely, they would chomp at it. They already try to suppress the people as is when it comes to voting.
You're naive if you think Republicans actually care about what is supposed to happen according to law. If there was a way they could get away with something like this to stay in power indefinitely, they would chomp at it. They already try to suppress the people as is when it comes to voting.
If you are able to stack the supreme court with enouph loyal stooges you could get away with anything as nothing within the system could stop that power.
To overturn a "president for life amendment"... I think they would. Americans hate change and the constitution is basically religious text to us.
No, I understand. But what would happen if he lost and the GOP said it was rigged, and Trump mobilized the military and declared martial law? Sure, the laws say he can't do that...but laws don't matter if you have guns. How do you think other democracies have fallen, like Germany, for example? Power comes from violence. We only transition peacefully because of the implicit threat of public violence if a person does not follow the rules. But if a person thought that they could ignore the threat or counter it and remain in power, then they could try.
After all, the law said that the Confederacy could not exist. Instead, they said that Lincoln's election was illegal and declared themselves independent and for a while, were succesful (until they were defeated militarily). But what if they had had a few more states on their side and had won? Then military might would have trumped democracy.
It's you who don't seem to understand that rules only matter if you can enforce them with violence. If you can't (if the rule-breaker can counter with even greater violence), then the rules can be broken.
The rules say that after an election is held, the winner becomes president on a certain date. But if a person had the backing of the military and say, 48% of the population, they could just declare themselves President for life. If enough opposed them and could take them down through violence then they would lose the position.
To insist otherwise is to show of prance of history, which has countless examples of "rightful" winners being killed or deposed. Hell, the US has helped overthrow democratic winners around the world using violence. As I said, might makes right, and the rules only count as long as there is no violence to overturn them.
Please note, I do not believe this will happen in the US, I am merely illustrating how rules are meaningless when countered with superior violence, as history has taught us.
Most of the right-wing base would go along with it if it meant they had a dictator for life that followed what they wanted and forced America into a far-right wing theocracy.
I think his chance passed at this point. He'd have had to do it before the midterms.
I think if they tried to do this, it'd be the Russian way. Complete sham elections where ever republican wins senate seats except maybe the most die hard democrat areas to looks legit. Then soon after a bunch of democrats get ousted by some fake/real scandals. Trump has the support in the senate right now, no longer in the house and I don't think any of the alphabet agencies like him nor the military and he can't take over shit without their full support.
I think if they tried to do this, it'd be the Russian way. Complete sham elections where ever republican wins senate seats except maybe the most die hard democrat areas to looks legit. Then soon after a bunch of democrats get ousted by some fake/real scandals. Trump has the support in the senate right now, no longer in the house and I don't think any of the alphabet agencies like him nor the military and he can't take over shit without their full support.
No. Don't fear monger like a conservative. If Trump loses, he's out. There's no loophole, no mechanism by which he can stay.
What he can - and likely will - do, is loudly claim the election results are not valid, that Democrats are cheating, etc. Hell, he did that after the election he won. His supporters' reaction to that worries me a little. And there may be bullshit legal challenges in GOP-controlled battleground states.
But unless we get a Florida 2000 too-close-to-call scenario, that will not stop the next president from taking office. It'll just muddy the waters so right wing media can have more talking points to keep their base angry and afraid.
What he can - and likely will - do, is loudly claim the election results are not valid, that Democrats are cheating, etc. Hell, he did that after the election he won. His supporters' reaction to that worries me a little. And there may be bullshit legal challenges in GOP-controlled battleground states.
But unless we get a Florida 2000 too-close-to-call scenario, that will not stop the next president from taking office. It'll just muddy the waters so right wing media can have more talking points to keep their base angry and afraid.
Well, duh. Republicans love power and hate democracy. I won't argue with you there.
But you yourself used the phrase "if there was a way." As of now, there really isn't.
No, you misunderstood me. There are two ways to amend the Constitution:
1. 2/3 of House and Senate pass amendment, after which 2/3 of state legislatures must ratify; OR
2. 2/3 of states demand constitutional convention, which has never happened and has no procedure.
A "president for life" amendment isn't passing via option 1, nor are there enough state legislatures willing to try option 2. It's not happening no matter what.
