Donald Trump flirted with the idea of being president for three terms – a clear violation of the US constitution – during a bombastic speech for the National Rifle Association in which he vowed to reverse gun safety measures green-lighted during the Biden administration.

“You know, FDR 16 years – almost 16 years – he was four terms. I don’t know, are we going to be considered three-term? Or two-term?” The ex-president and GOP presidential frontrunner said to the organization’s annual convention in Dallas, prompting some in the crowd to yell “three!” Politico reported.

Trump has floated a third term in past comments, even mentioning a prolonged presidency while campaigning in 2020. He has also tried distancing himself from this idea, telling Time magazine in April: “I wouldn’t be in favor of it at all. I intend to serve four years and do a great job.”

  • FakeGreekGirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    257
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    And that’s a big part of why, despite everything Biden is doing, I am 100% voting for him. Because if Biden wins, there will be a 2028 election where we can hopefully find someone better, and I’m not convinced that there will be under Trump.

    Four years of Trump came really close to turning this country into a kakistocratic dictatorship. I really don’t want to give him another chance.

    • jettrscga@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      64
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      6 months ago

      Despite what that Biden’s doing exactly? I’ve heard about Israel weapon sales that are now being forced through by republicans as well. What else?

          • twack@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            53
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            Plus Biden attempted to block any more aid for Israel and the Republicans rammed it through anyway.

          • brey1013@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            Exactly. America funding genocides is inevitable, no matter their elected ‘leader’. Money go brrr.

            • UFO64@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              6 months ago

              The president doesn’t get to unilaterally declare law, he at best has the veto but his job is to forfill the will of the people and by extension Congress.

              If congress orders the money and guns to Israel, he cannot stop them.

        • stratoscaster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          30
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Why not educate someone who is earnestly asking? There is so much information and misinformation, just typing “Biden Israel” into Google and expecting full context is hopeless.

          • Eldritch@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            That’s a very true thing. The problem with search engines anymore. There’s so much money in propaganda and misinformation. Getting on and finding real information as opposed to false information can be a daunting task.

            • Xanis@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              6 months ago

              Guys, I think this guy works in News /s. He’s being sensationalist, isn’t actually answering any questions anyone is asking, is focusing on the bad, and is seemingly reaaally determined to get a rise out of someone.

        • jettrscga@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          25
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          You fully misunderstood my stance. The person I responded to said “despite everything Biden is doing” as if he’s created other controversy. I was asking what that controversy is.

    • Suavevillain@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      6 months ago

      People say we can find someone better next time and still vote for yell for everyone to vote for every Neoliberal like Biden when they show up on the ballot. The lesser evil route is what got us here now.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        “Where we are now” is nowhere near as bad as things could be. Nazi Germany, Mussolini’s Italy, and Franco’s Spain all happened. Equally bad things could happen here, and in fact they have happened here. Remember how half this country’s economy was based on chattel slavery and it led to a bloody civil war? And how there was a genocide of the indigenous population? Is that what you want? Because that’s the kind of shit we’re in for if we let the fascists win.

    • retrospectology@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      57
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Why on earth would you think democrats would allow for someone better in 2028? Biden’s win will prove that they can continue propping up fascist extremists and you’ll vote for fascist lite.

      You’re not describing a strategy, you’re describing a slow death.

      • FakeGreekGirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Even so, still better than a perpetual Trump dictatorship.

        If Trump wins, he will, without a doubt, try again to end American democracy. He did before. And whatever you think of our current situation, at least we have a fucking voice right now.

        • retrospectology@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          29
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          It’s likely not better though, as the longer we let Dmeocrats play dick-grab with the GOP without actually fighting back tooth and nail (like politician’s like Biden are unwilling to do) the more the GOP is able to use their power in a way that’s concealed.

          The reason RvW had a political effect is because it was shocking and too sudden. What will happen if we keep voting the lesser of two evils is people will get more and more acclimated to having their rights stripped away in small ways, rather than witnessing the horror in a way that’s easy to understand.

          Even now, in this discussion, it’s difficult for you to see the pattern that’s occurring from the strategy you’re proposing of fear-based voting.

          It’s uncertain whether a Trump term will allow for the GOP to enact their fascist take-over in full, but continuing to vote for the same milque-toast democrats is 100% a recipe for fascism because they will never reform on their own, and the general public will accept fascism if it comes slowly. I’m not going to try to tell you how to vote, but just own the consequences when they come and don’t try to blame others.

          • FakeGreekGirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            27
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            You seem to still be thinking in terms of Trump doing a term and going away. He won’t. He proved that on 1/6/2021, and his little jokes and musings now only reinforce it.

            I have every expectation that, if Trump manages to become President again, he is not leaving that office until he dies. He will undo American democracy to keep his power. He already tried before.

            Biden sucks. Democrats suck. You won’t catch me arguing with you there. But Trump is the death of the Republic.

            • retrospectology@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              14
              ·
              6 months ago

              Fear-based politics are worthless to me. That is the reason the GOP treats the Democrats as prey, not a threat.

                • retrospectology@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  8
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Literally where we are, right now. The only (slim) chance of getting out is reforming the democratic party and shocking the general public awake.

                  Your way has been a proven failure, it’s not an option.

              • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                So why are you so terrified of Democrats? Seems to me like you’re all about emotion-based politics, including fear.

        • retrospectology@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          18
          ·
          6 months ago

          I’ll take the lack of an argument as a confirmation that you understand what I said is true. Anyone who’s been alive for more than a single election has witnessed it, it’s pretty undeniable.

      • zbyte64@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        I don’t even expect Democrats to “learn their lesson” by loosing an election, let alone reform democracy.

        • Facebones@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          They made it clear in 2016, they’d rather the Republicans win than give even an INCH to the left of mid right establishment dems.

      • Facebones@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Hard agree. I’m tired of people saying the only way to avoid fascism is the guy who

        • sidestepped congress multiple times to fund/supply genocide,

        • is pushing legislation to strip leftist orgs of nonprofit status,

        • pushing legislation to make ANY criticism of Israel legally antisemitic so they can strip any college that allows protests of funding and accreditation

        • coming from a party that at the slightest whiff of a challenge had it legally ruled that they do what they want, voters and donors be damned

        • also a party equally complicit in moving the goalposts any time a third party comes close to meeting requirements for inclusion.

        America has always been fascist, ruled by a singular corporate party with two wings. The quiet part is out loud now and even prominent democrats and pundits can’t help themselves but break out all the fascist stops on leftists.

        When democrats and liberals say “we have to stop fascism” they mean “we have to protect my status quo and the fascism that benefits me.”

        • Suavevillain@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          It most comes down to maintaining comfort. Liberals have no issue with groups being harmed by state violence from police and other groups when they aren’t the targets. Dems had 4 years to prepare and look forward to what is coming, and the best we have is Joe Biden standing between the status quo and Trump’s full-blown fascism.

          • Facebones@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            They like to ignore that dems have had a few opportunities with the trifecta to actually codify these issues and enact stronger policies against the threats we face now (that were apparent at the time) but the problem is democrats don’t WANT to lock those basic rights issues down because they need the existential threat. Their only platform for like 20 years now has been “not those guys” so if they actually codified (for example) abortion or even better added it to an amendment - They wouldn’t be able to push this narrative that if you don’t vote for milquetoast mid right Biden then you’re actually WORSE than the fascists and you hate women and you’re handing their freedom to “”“the right”“” on a silver platter.

            America has always been a single corporate party system, and both wings of that party are pushing for fascism because it’s the end goal of any capitalist system. It’s just a fight between “marginalized folk are slowly and quietly suppressed so my life continues as normal” fascism or “quiet part out loud day one which I would have to acknowledge” fascism.

    • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      61
      ·
      6 months ago

      there will be a 2028 election where we can hopefully find someone better

      I’ve literally had people utter this to me before every single presidential election that I’ve voted in and it’s never come true. Neither party has any incentive to improve things when they’re guaranteed to get votes because “the other guys are boogeymen!”

      • FakeGreekGirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        54
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        So when Trump pulls another January 6, but succeeds this time and declares himself president for life, do you think that will make the situation better or worse?

        • acetanilide@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          My concern is that he will run again and again until he dies. Ideally if he won this year he could never run again. Obviously he’s a fascist so he will probably try to stay in (again) but man I am not looking forward to the next 20-50 years of him. And I’m guessing he’s going to live forever at this point.

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            6 months ago

            Trump has visibly diminished in the last 4 years, as has his influence. Now he seems like the tail the dog is wagging but before he called himself the dog. I just don’t see him lasting that long

          • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            6 months ago

            20-50 years??? How young do you think trump is??? 50 years from now he would be 127! 20 years from now he would 97.

            We’re not going to have even 5 years of trump left. Even if he wins and serves a full term. I may be wrong, but I don’t imagine him living to 83.

              • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                For a half second I thought you were calling trump the clay rock superhero from the fantastic four.

                I may have only thought it for a half second, but I’m still already making popcorn. Because of how entertaining it would be to watch you explain how trump is The Thing.

                • acetanilide@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  I hope you have your popcorn! I outsourced the explanation though.

                  Imagine Donald Trump as The Thing from the Fantastic Four: an oversized, lumbering figure with an unmistakable, gaudy orange, rock-like exterior. His presence is hard to ignore, not just because of his sheer size and brashness but because he bulldozes through political and social norms with little finesse, much like The Thing smashing through walls.

                  In this form, Trump’s bluntness and tendency to overpower conversations mirror The Thing’s raw physicality. His speeches are repetitive and simplistic, hammering his points home in a manner akin to The Thing’s catchphrase, “It’s clobberin’ time!”—straightforward and unsubtle.

                  However, just as The Thing struggles with his monstrous appearance, Trump’s public persona is marked by a mix of bravado and thin-skinned sensitivity. His abrasive approach often alienates allies and emboldens critics, making his interactions as rocky as his hypothetical exterior. Both figures are defined by their confrontational nature, but where The Thing’s battles are physical, Trump’s are rhetorical and often divisive.

        • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          6 months ago

          That’d be quite the feat considering we have the Constitution and Congress. How do you suppose he’d succeed at this considering Trump and Co were basically laughed out of every courtroom when they brought their election fraud cases to court? He doesn’t need to be president for another Jan 6 to happen. He just needs a microphone and a big crowd of pissed off smooth-brains.

          • FakeGreekGirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Who needs courts when you have a cult of personality, a lot of whom have organized into paramilitary groups?

            Even now, the courts are failing to hold him responsible for what he did. They won’t save us. And half of Congress is on his fucking side.

            • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              6 months ago

              If paramilitary groups are how he seizes control of the government, then it doesn’t really matter whether he was elected or not because you’re talking about outright treason and a civil war, neither of which are predicated on him being elected to office first.

              How can you say “who needs courts” when the courts already shot his election fraud nonsense down in every single case they tried to bring? The trial for J6 has barely begun so how can you claim the outcome already? He was already convicted in the NY civil fraud trial.

              Maybe you should ask yourself why the guy who’s running against him can’t even be bothered to shape himself up when, as you claim, we’re on the verge of far-right paramilitary groups staging a coup if he doesn’t win? How shitty at your job do you have to be that you can’t even win against that?

              • FakeGreekGirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                You’re preaching to the choir here. Biden is shit. But, again, at least I know he’ll go away in 4 years. Trump is going to try his damnedest not to. He already fucking tried once. And frankly, the fact that it’s been four years and he’s free to try again is proof enough the courts aren’t doing enough to stop him. There’s a reason they’ve been pushing all this stuff until after election.

                Open your eyes and stop pretending Trump is normal. In nearly 250 years that this country has existed, nobody has tried to pull the shit he’s tried to pull, and he will try it again.

      • barsquid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Donald did do an insurrection on his way out in 2021. Oh, did you not vote in 2016? Maybe you are technically correct.

      • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        6 months ago

        Trump can’t be both “different from everyone else” and “everyone’s worries about the guy are unfounded, he’s just another politician.”

        While I know you didn’t say he’s the same, per se, you might as well by comparing alarms that Obama or Romney are going to be forever presidents to the guy literally “joking” about being a forever president that’s taken possibly criminal steps to subvert the results of an election already.

        It’s not just the fringe paranoid folks saying “this could be the end of democracy as we know it if Trump wins.”

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        There are generally better things happening under democratic rule than republican rule. I get that it can feel small to those of us who want more radical change but there is a difference.

        But I agree. Radical change is probably not happening from within the current system. Direct action and external pressure will be needed. But there is still a difference in how tolerant the two parties (and also between intra-party factions) will be of such a movement.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        If Biden wins, then in 2028 he won’t be able to run again, and Trump won’t physically be able to. I’m reasonably confident there will be two “new” choices.

        I’m very happy DeSantis seems to have crashed and burned, Christie had his last hurrah, and no one took Ramiswami seriously, but even Sanders’ age is a passing of the torch.

        So, will you support Harris, Newsom, or AOC to go up against Abbot?

        • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          6 months ago

          I’d support AOC but Newsom or Harris are more “status quo” Dems so they’ll probably get all the backing from the party in order to prevent a progressive from getting the nomination once again.

  • DudeImMacGyver@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    122
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    The same guy who unilaterally banned bump stocks with an executive order being hosted by the NRA shows how much the NRA actually cares about the second amendment.

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      6 months ago

      Are you claiming the “take the guns first” guy isn’t a strong 2A supporter? Say it isn’t so!

    • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      6 months ago

      Bump stocks and all other focuses on rate of fire are more or less a sacrificial lamb. It provides a strong distinction between “Heh, stupid fucking loser thinking ‘assault rifles’ are actually a thing” and “semi-automatic versions of rifles specifically designed for and used by military forces”

      When the reality is that basically every military strong discourages the use of full auto by anyone whose job is not to carry a machine gun of some form. But, because that AR-15 you bought at Walmart doesn’t have full auto, it isn’t a military weapon.

      And because it is our god given right to carry an m249 everywhere we go, it is a horrible insult to the gun nuts of the world to lose their full auto capabilities so we should all feel warm and fuzzy and stop trying to stop kids from getting shot.

      • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        That’s because full auto rifles*, are typically seen as wasting limited ammunition. A modern military unit isn’t likely to encounter a bunched together group of 30-50 soft targets where a full auto rifle would be most effective…unlike a mass shooter indiscriminately targeting a crowded concert.

        *Rifles, not machine guns. I’m well aware of the utility of squad machine gunners, talking guns, etc.

        • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          First off: modern militaries DO get some nice mass executions a lot more often than one would expect. Well worth doing some reading up on that.

          Second: Automatic fire is still horrible for that. If your bullets have a high degree of penetration then you are, generally mortally, wounding multiple civilians per shot and are better at aimed shots at clusters of women and children. Or your bullets don’t have a high degree of penetration and you mostly just light up one or two kindergartners whose corpses take up most of the shots. At which point you are, again, better off at firing off a bunch of snap shots.

          Third: The actual reason militaries have automatic weapons is for situations where aiming is difficult or less important. Machine gunners at the squad level are expected to fire very short controlled bursts (otpimally single shots) to actually suppress a target when trying to “keep some heads down” so that the maneuver group can flank. Or they are engaging at significantly longer ranges (which is why machine guns often have a larger caliber round than the rifles) where a short burst increases the likelihood of hitting a target. And while it is mostly out of favor, many infantry rifles had burst fire capability or even simultaneous fire capability (either with two barrels or a ridiculously high rate of fire burst) to increase the likelihood of infantry hitting a target by spending more on ammo than training (before realizing it significantly increases the cost of the weapons AND requires more training so that the high schoolers can maintain their weapons in the field). But modern optics, and a decade or two of being the only people with NVGs, rendered that obsolete.

      • DudeImMacGyver@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah bullshit, these assholes don’t give a fuck about your rights or mine, they care about their power, money, and influence.

  • theprogressivist @lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    98
    ·
    6 months ago

    “If the Biden regime gets four more years, they are coming for your guns,” Trump railed.

    Really pulling out the “greatest hits” with this piece here. He’s got nothing else.

    • gregorum@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      That’s a GOP golden oldie. I’ve heard that same bs line since the early 90s at least.

      • rwhitisissle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        And it’s a great line for the gun lobby. In a lot of ways, the NRA and gun manufacturers would prefer a Biden victory because gun sales spike when Democratic presidents get elected, as gun-nuts are certain every time it happens that this is the time, for real, that they’re “coming for our guns.” In other words, people panic buy rifles because they think a federal ban is coming. But the reality is that Dems will never push through sweeping anti-gun legislation because there are so many pro-2FA democrats out there that doing so would be ludicrously difficult and monumentally unpopular.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        This is partly just blowback from everyone agreeing to use different vocabulary for governments we like vs governments we don’t. We never should have tolerated the blatant propaganda of the US having an “administration” while our adversaries have “regimes”.

        There are lots of other examples of journalists using loaded vocabulary this way. Most of them escape me at the moment but I can think of a few, like “freedom fighters” vs “insurgents” or “terrorists”, and “police action” or “peacekeeping force” vs “occupation” or “invasion”.

    • Huschke@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      6 months ago

      “Let me tell you, folks, it’s so true. Just like Putin, right? It’s unbelievable. We start with 3, then we go to 4, and then 5. It’s all about strength, and nobody knows strength like me. We’re talking about a progression, a strategy. Just like Putin does, so smart. You have to move step by step, building power. That’s how you win, that’s how you get things done. Trust me, it works.”

      Trump in one of his rallies (probably)

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        His kids lack a great deal of his rizz. DT Jr is too weak, Eric is dumb as dishwater, and Ivanka has the girl cooties that sink every woman Republican candidate for the Presidency.

  • UmeU@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Ok hear me out…

    Trump wants to be a dictator, sure. He was a terrible president and it would be a disaster if he was reelected.

    Now that you know my position, listen to what he said at the NRA convention. He wasn’t saying ‘hey maybe I’ll serve 3 terms’… what he was saying was ‘if I get elected in 2024 then would that be two terms or three terms? Because we all know I was elected to a second term back in 2020 and so even though Biden is acting president, I am in my second term now, so a win in 2024 is a third term.’

    The man is an idiot and rambled incoherently throughout the NRA speech. He reiterated his usual batch of racist xenophobic statements and bragged about his uncle at MIT… he is a one trick pony and there is plenty to poke fun at.

    Would he tout the idea of a third term for himself? Sure! Is that what he did in this case, not precisely.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Exactly. Of course, by putting forth the belief that 2020-2024 was his second term, he should just bow out since he has also said he would not want to challenge the 22nd amendment.

  • gregorum@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    The only time we elected a president more than twice, it was a Socialist, and he was so popular that we had to pass a law after he was elected a fourth time so it didn’t happen again.

    Edit: fixed!

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      The only time we elected a president 3 times, it was a Socialist

      FDR was elected to four terms. He died 85 days into his fourth.

      and he was so popular that we had to pass a law to keep him from being elected a fourth time.

      The 22nd amendment wasn’t even drafted until after FDR was dead, and wasn’t ratified until 1951. And the language of the amendment specifically exempts the president at the time of ratification. The 22nd Amendment wouldn’t have stopped Truman from running again, let alone his predecessor.

          • gregorum@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            6 months ago

            You got downvoted too, lol.

            People in Lemmy can be odd. I’ve noticed that, once in a while, I may pick up a stan. After a possibly terse exchange, I’ll see all comments/posts have, like, as single downvote for a few days.

    • BigFig@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      FDR was a Social Democrat not a Democratic Socialist. Similar but very different

    • Sunforged@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      FDR was not a socialist and the New Deal was a compromise from the existing capitalist power structure in order to harness and then diffuse the growing socialist energy in the country. It’s a huge reason the New Deal focused so much on highway expansion instead of public transportation.

    • brain_in_a_box@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      I know that the overton window has moved a long way to the right since then, but FDR was a long fucking way from being a socialist; a social democrat at best, but probably more accurate to say he was just what a capitalist was before the neoliberal turn.

  • Sludgehammer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    6 months ago

    So let’s see here, Trump is 77 years old, but will be 78 at the time of election. Let’s just add eight years and we get 86… yep he’s angling for president for life.

  • Alto@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    noted fascist is a fascist, more at 5

    Guys I’m starting to think that this Trump fellow might not like democracy