Also important to know, if democrats take back the house, Johnson would no longer be speaker at the time the presidential election is certified. It's the next congress, not the current one, that will certify the vote. New congress is seated on January 3rd 2025, and the presidential election certification is on January 6th 2025.
Exactly right. I almost typed the same thing before I read your comment.
Congress writes the laws. They can even amend the Constitution with 2/3 majority. Whoever controls Congress controls the nation’s direction.
Please vote.
They can even amend the Constitution with 2/3 majority.
I think 3/4 of the states also need to ratify those amendments.
3/4ths of the states are needed to pass an amendment over the federal government or perhaps in spite of the federal government too.
If they take control of both houses of congress, I would like to think one of the first things they would do is expand the supreme court with the justification that denying Obama an appointee was straight-up unforgivably unethical. And suspend the filibuster to do it.
You're giving them far too much credit before the fact. I'd be very surprised if the Dems did anything to the court unless there's an open seat.
I hate the fact that you're probably correct.
No, that's why I said "I'd like to think." Because I don't.
This. So much this.
Speaker Johnson has no role in certifying the election, that's the job of the President of the Senate, Kamala Harris.
It takes 1/5 of the house and 1/5 of the Senate to object to election certification results. He's the leader of the Republicans in the house and could lead them to these objections. You're supposed to have evidence of some kind of wrongdoing but.... Welp.
Edit: Was informed by a comment above that if Dems take the house, he would no longer be speaker at the time of the certification. Certification is Jan 6, but the new Congress is installed on Jan 3. VOTE!
Recent history in the US is certainly a lesson in what happens if "supposed to" is tested.
General Mark Milley, then Chair of the Joint Chiefs, made clear in private and later in public, that Trump lost the election and would not remain in power. "We are the guys with the guns," he is quoted as saying.
No reason to think the new Chair, General Brown, won't be as committed to his oath. Can't happen without him.
We all know they are already weighing all their options to cheat.
The House and the Senate hold a joint session. He'll have some ceremonial participation, which he could use to stall and obstruct, but he can't really stop the certification process.
Jesus fuck I so wish that the producers in the back room would just tell the anchors to rhetorically take the gloves off when Trump or Vance or some other fuckstick tries to outright lie and propagandize with racist and nationalist ~~dog~~ whistles on national fucking television. Or at the very least just cut their mic and tell the idiot fuck to leave immediately or be escorted out.
Only one side of the desk is conducting the interview in a civil fashion. The other refuses to. This is the paradox of tolerance in action, live, on television, streaming to the whole fucking country.
You gotta remember that the heads of these media conglomerates are rich people at the end of the day. A lot of their interests align with Trump. The irony is Trump screams and cries that the media is biased against him, the very media constantly and actively propping him up.
Oh I know.
The anchors clearly wish so too. As evidenced by the network running the second debate agreeing to no muting of mics or fact checking. Only for the moderators to do both.
If that happens, the cons should remember that their court gave Biden the ability to do whatever he wants while still in office.
I believe it is subject to to the court's rule.
Don't worry, the ones who are left will rule in his favour
To which a President may say, "the court and what army?"
Would not certifying the results mean that Joe Biden would remain as President? If they wanted to fuck around for too long, Biden could resign which would mean his Vice President would become President.
This is correct, and he would have ~~another 6 years left maximum~~ however long he's alive actually.
~~Term limits only apply to the elections in the US, not time spent in office. The maximum amount of time anyone can spend as president and still be elected is one day less than 6 years.~~
Edit: A lot of that is wrong
This is not true. If the speaker refuses to certify the election and neither candidate gets the electoral votes to win, it moves to a contingent election where the House votes for the President and the Senate votes for the vice-president.
Biden will not remain in power, the contingent election would be forced and the House would obviously vote for Trump. Then someone who lost the popular vote and lost the electoral college would miraculously have won the election.
Are you sure about that? That happens if they refuse to certify?
How's that second part?
What?
Term limits only apply to elections?
And why six year max?
IDK why it's set to six years to be re-elected. It's probably there for convenience? Of a sort.
If an ex-vice-president served even one minute as acting president, then if the limit was two terms they wouldn't be able to serve two terms.
If the speaker refuses to certify the election and neither candidate gets the electoral votes to win, it moves to a contingent election where the House votes for the President and the Senate votes for the vice-president.
Biden will not remain in power, the contingent election would be forced and the House would obviously vote for Trump. Then someone who lost the popular vote and lost the electoral college would miraculously have won the election.
And we either put several million people on the streets in DC or lose our democracy at that moment.
That said there is something nobody is accounting for. If Trump loses the election the GOP could just abandon him at that point. Declare him the weird intern who only ever did coffee runs.
This is the easiest counter honestly.
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News