“I know it’s hypothetical right now, but if you’re allowed for some reason to run for a third term, is there a thought that Democrats could try to run Barack Obama against you?” Fox News correspondent Peter Doocy asked Trump in the Oval Office on Monday…

  • reluctant_squidd@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    1 day ago

    This reads like an obvious ploy to soften the idea to his base. They hate Obama too, probably because Trump does.

    What other opponent would ire them more? Also, if someone like Obama was on-board, it would be more of a challenge to the rule against it from both sides. Democrats rally behind Obama, Voting machine hackers behind Trump.

    Is like a pretext to calling Obama a chicken for not doing it down the road.

  • GuyFawkes@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    113
    ·
    2 days ago

    No. Hard stop. This is just him trying to force Dems to decide that they’re okay with the idea of a third term and then use that admission against them to support why it’s okay for him.

    Cut off any thoughts of third terms NOW.

  • Foxymophandle@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 day ago

    Trump has such a hard on about Obama. He lives rent free in trumps mind.

    Also, he’s already stacked the deck so of course he would love to get the next win against him.

    • NeonNight@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’m convinced the only reason he went from saying he’ll run to actually trying to run was that White House Correspondent’s dinner in 2011 where Obama made fun of Trump a bunch.

  • Nay@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    142
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Oh, normalization of a third term. Cool.

    Cool, cool, cool.

  • zbyte64@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    ·
    2 days ago

    Should run against a giant guillotine. Something tells me the guillotine would win the popular vote.

    • WuceBrillis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 day ago

      But as they like to remind us every time i remind them of their second amendment, its only the republicans that are 2a Defenders 😂

      Their whole country is getting taken over by Nazis, and they’re too afraid to do anything. Americans are pussies.

    • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Bannon has stated publicly they are working on working around the constitution to do so.

      One trick would be via order of succession. Eg JD runs for prez, some rando as VP, trump as VP speaker, JD resigns, VP resigns, trump is acting prez.

      • wildncrazyguy138@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 days ago

        It certainly goes against the spirit of it, but yea, the amendment says no person shall be elected more than twice.

        It’s something entirely different to be elected the highest office in the land and be such a sycophant as to give it away to a madman.

  • PaulBunyan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    Trump would love to run against Obama because he knows if he loses it’d be easy to dispute a third Obama term.

  • entwine413@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    It would be nice to see Trump get absolutely destroyed by the person he hates most in the world.

    • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      I doubt it. Obama really went into the dark side after his first term, so he’d only be marginally better than your average Dem candidate.

        • WuceBrillis@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          So you’ve been a sucker that voted against your own interests your whole life lol.

          Unless you are a millionaire, voting against workers rights, raising the minimum wage, expanding public schools and universal healthcare makes you a class traitor.

          • Windex007@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            Tell me you didn’t finish reading even one complete sentence before responding, without telling me you didn’t even read one complete sentence before responding.

            • WuceBrillis@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              2 days ago

              Nah, i read it. “Conservative voter with ethics” still means voting against workers rights, voting against raising the minimum wage, voting against universal healthcare and voting against better public education.

              Republicans per definition are class traitors.

              • Windex007@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                17
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                2 days ago

                Imagine having someone tell you that despite a right leaning tendency, they still vote for Democrats.

                And then you swoop in and tell them they’re a giant piece of shit.

                You know that your behavior is literally what Russian troll farms are intended to cultivate as per the Muler report, right?

                • CarnivorousCouch@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Some people seem to have an inability to understand the importance of coalition building in a democratic society. That’s kind of the whole thing.

                  Like, sure there’s a time and place for us to argue differences, but how productive is it to just lead in with calling someone a class traitor? Regardless of whether someone feels that’s true, is that a helpful approach? What purpose does that really serve?

        • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          Obama broke like half or more of his promises, like ending the war on terror, closing Guatanamo Bay and universal healthcare. Maybe you liked that, but “conservatives with ethics”—if we accept their existence, which I don’t—don’t exist in nearly enough numbers to matter, and the people who do matter in this equation absolutely hated it.

            • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              9
              ·
              2 days ago

              Obama exceeds the realm of purism or not; the man is barely any better than Hillary these days. If you think someone like that—who, again, is now known to be a liar by his would be most ardent supporters—can beat Trump, then you haven’t been paying attention. The past three general elections have proven decisively that motivated and politically active voters who support the party platform are crucial to securing victory, and as a matter of strategy Obama doesn’t have any of those.

      • entwine413@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Voters don’t really pay close enough attention for that to matter. The vast majority couldn’t tell you a single ‘dark side’ thing he did.

        Obama is super charismatic, which is a large part of why he won in the first place.

        • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          The vast majority couldn’t tell you a single ‘dark side’ thing he did.

          Maybe, but the progressive activist base does and without that he’s hopeless.

      • qantravon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        “But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.”

        -12th Amendment

        Also, succession skips other people who would be ineligible, as the requirements for being a member of the House allow people who are ineligible to be President to serve as Speaker of the House, who is otherwise 3rd in line.

        • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Fair enough. Then he becomes speaker and then

          Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.

          So he acts as president.

          Point being. If you think there isn’t a loophole they won’t exploit you haven’t been paying attention.

          • WhatSay@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            Everybody is trying to figure out the storyline arc to this bs, like some Netflix series. Maybe people will stop voting for celebrities and reality TV stars, I hope.