this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2024
184 points (94.2% liked)

politics

19089 readers
3726 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Mob boss warns: “I just hope we get fair treatment,” Trump said at an Iowa rally Friday. “Because if we don’t, our country’s in big, big trouble. Does everybody understand what I’m saying?”

Trump also complained of Democrats casting doubt on the court because Trump appointed three of its justices, claiming that they are attempting to put undue political pressure on the court’s decisions.

“They’re saying, ‘Oh, Trump owns the Supreme Court, he owns it. He owns it. If they make a decision for him, it will be terrible. It’ll ruin their reputations,” he said. “‘He owns the Supreme Court. He put on three judges. He owns the Supreme Court. If they rule in his favor, it will be horrible for them. And we’ll protest at their houses.’”

“That puts pressure on people to do the wrong thing. What they’re doing is no different than Bobby Knight,” he continued, referring to the legendary college basketball coach famous for raucous arguments with referees.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 40 points 10 months ago (5 children)

Supreme Court rules that Colorado's decision is upheld, more states can follow through with their own bans towards Trump.

Supreme Court rules that Colorado's decision must be overturned, it sets a precedent for federal regulation of state election processes (which red states have been the most resistant towards).

I'm not counting on the Supreme Court not finding some way to fuck everything up, but the decision could be a win-win. Kick Trump off the ballot, or kickstart federal election reform.

[–] randon31415@lemmy.world 22 points 10 months ago

Supreme Court: Consitution doesn't have anything to do with primaries. You could run Airbud in a primary and he could win it - but he would be ineligible for the general. Come back after the primaries and we will rule on Trump's eligibility in like March of 25.

[–] Bonehead@kbin.social 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You forgot option C: Supreme Court rules that Colorado's decision must be overturned, and Republicans spend the year roadblocking everything with extreme prejudice until the election. That's how they got 3 Supreme Court Judge picks while blocking Democrats from picking.

[–] QHC@lemmy.one 6 points 10 months ago

That's option two, the sheep will cry bloody murder regardless.

[–] Bridger@sh.itjust.works 5 points 10 months ago

Supreme Court somehow tortures logic to say trump gets whatever he wants, everybody else can fuck off.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

What the SC will decide is that every state has the right to run their elections. Trump will get banned from states that have laws preventing ineligible candidates from appearing on the ballot, and Red states remove Biden from their ballots because they are regressive shit heads.

[–] bluewing@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

I'm surprised they even want anything to do with this. I don't there is a decision they can make that won't piss off half the country no matter what.

If they decide states have a right to control who can be banned from running in an election, then there is a clear pathway for states to ban anyone who does not align with their views from being on a ballet - See: Missouri Secretary of State stating Biden will be banned if the bans against Trump stand. Tit for tat becomes the standard.

Or if the decision is to say states don't have the right to ban a obviously evil candidate, then there is no pathway to prevent evil from winning.

Or if they say this ONLY applies to Trump, then evil wins again and open violence becomes a very real risk.