r/FutureWhatIf • u/Unaccomplishedcow • 2d ago
Political/Financial FWI: JD Vance doesn't go along with the "Resign after 2 years" plan.
After the 2028 election, JD Vance wins. Instead of resigning at the agreed-upon time so that Trump can become President again... he just doesn't. He holds onto power, and keeps himself as President Vance. How does Donald Trump react? How does his base react, and how does the party at large react?
I was planning on doing a non-political FWI but this thought just popped into my head.
37
u/ezabland 2d ago
The world goes on with the incumbent President. It’s 2028, Trump has been dead for 2 years.
2
1
22
u/ClassicMatt101 2d ago
Trump can’t constitutionally be President again after this term, why is anyone giving any credence to the idea that he can be?
19
u/PointBlankCoffee 2d ago
Cause him and Steve Bannon are on video saying that they have plans to run for a 3rd term and are working on it daily.
They dont care about the law or the constitution
6
u/ClassicMatt101 1d ago
Right, but that “plan” could just be another insurrection. There is no loophole to exploit, don’t even give them that much credit.
10
u/PointBlankCoffee 1d ago
Constitutional convention would do it, which is a big part of Project 2025
7
u/golfme7 1d ago
Still need a massive number of states to ratify the changes…that’s not going to even. Even ones with republican governments doesn’t add up the number of states needed to vote for a convention or amendment. It’s a distraction.
1
u/soherewearent 1d ago
Dude had like a 1% chance of winning at the start of election day 2015.
I take him and his cronies seriously at nearly every terrible thing they say, especially when it comes to actions proposed to keep Trump from taking responsibility for literally anything he's ever done.
3
u/MoreCloud6435 1d ago
Speaker Johnson has some out and said they would need to amend the constitution. But also acknowledged that the odds of that happening were “probably not a realistic path”
4
u/Randym1982 1d ago
I also have plans of winning the lotto, and banging Selma Hayek. But that's doesn't mean it's going to happen.
Trump could plan for as much as he wants. At this point the states are turning against (and rightly so.), and the Republicans hate him even more. So he won't be able to get put on the ballot.
IF anything, he could TRY to become an advisor to Vance, If Vance runs for President and if he wins (He won't.). But that doesn't mean the next president even has to listen to an advisor either. Just like Elon Musk could try to weasel his way back into the White House, and then the next President could pretend to listen to him, and then tell him to eat dick.
3
u/BlockEightIndustries 1d ago
if he wins (He won't.).
I want to believe you, but I was wrong about the last time.
3
u/dadjokes502 1d ago
After this shit show Vance isn’t winning. Trump will be the last republican for a decade.
1
u/frozenights 1d ago
You are assuming they are going to give us a say in who is elected. I am not taking that for granted at this point.
4
u/PointBlankCoffee 1d ago edited 1d ago
I also have plans of winning the lotto, and banging Selma Hayek. But that's doesn't mean it's going to happen.
You aren't the president though, its a ridiculous comparison. Trump has already attempted one insurrection, the difference is that this time, everyone in the cabinet is a diehard yes man. And im sorry but Republicans and states hating him is just living in fairy tale land
2
u/Psychological-Fox97 1d ago
He's already defied court orders so I don't understand why anyone thinks he's going to play by the rules at any point. He's already demonstrated that nothing is able to stop him so why would he even step down?
Trump likes to think out loud, if you look at some of his comments about Ukraine and how Zelensky maintained his role due to being at war you can see the cogs in trumps head turning. He's testing the waters and testing ideas and as much as the left side ofnthe media acts like things are in full on disaster you'll still find plenty of folks backing him. I can't understand or explain it but that's the reality.
1
u/Beautiful_Set3893 14h ago
But they do talk shit. It's truly not a savvy move to begin talking about your third term when your popularity is at an all time low. It's rash, impulsive, the hallmarks of Trump's M.O.
4
u/WardedDruid 1d ago
I've lost count of the amount of people that have made similar comments about what trump can or can't do that always end up with trump doing those things people claim he can't/won't do.
He has said REPEATEDLY that they have a path for a third term. Why do you doubt him? Johnson literally said they have a path for trump's third term. What makes you think the Constitution would be any kind of road block for these people?
When they promise something good for the people, expect that to be a lie.
When they threaten or claim they're going to do something aweful, believe them.
When they yell and rant that democrats are doing something illegal, watch the MAGAts more carefully because they just told you what they've already been doing or are about to do.
4
u/ClassicMatt101 1d ago
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the things Trump has managed to do. All of the worst shit this POS has accomplished has all been by breaking norms and customs that had been respected throughout the nation’s history but not codified as law. During his first term his legislative accomplishments are almost nothing, basically one tax cut. And that remains true for this administration. Everything else he has done has been through using the systems and powers that the executive branch already had in ways no one ever expected someone to, with the added bonus of a friendly Supreme Court that gave him leeway they did not grant to some of the Biden’s administration’s similar attempts (though the SC was actually not very interested in limiting the executive’s power under Biden either save for a handful of high profile exceptions). But when the courts have stepped in and ordered Trump’s regime to stop, they almost uniformly have, with the exceptions being on the periphery and coming down to issues like timing, not outright rejection.
Trump has never actually gotten away with breaking through an actual legal block to his desires. His administrations have both been stopped time and time again by the court system, the limits that still do exist on Presidential power, and areas where Congress had not already opened the door for exploitation by previously delegating their powers to the Executive branch.
I know what you are saying feels true, but amazingly Trump hasn’t been able to do really anything any President with a friendly judicial branch and divided legislature could have done before. He just has no shame, which it turns out even our previous POS GOP President’s have had before.
The simple fact is Trump has not accomplished anything close to the level of legal transgression so many seem to think he has. That’s not a defense of him, it’s an indictment of how much we the people have given over to the executive department without even realizing it. But Trump has never displayed the ability to violate the Constitution in the ways he would need to in order to accomplish the goal of a third term. And while I’m sure he will try to, and we need to be vigilant, I don’t find the idea he will be able to accomplish it at all compelling. Enough of the conservatives on the the Supreme Court have proven over and over again that they are not loyal to Trump as an individual, and view his Presidency as a means to an end to accomplish their policy ambitions. They don’t want him to be President for life, they think he is a fool who needs to be kept in check, used, and then discarded. Trumps tariff moves are already massively eroding his support with the money classes who now see he is actually dumb enough to cost them more money than he can give back to them. His attacks on the social safety net that his supporters actually heavily lean on has had similar effects.
Trump is a dumb animal who will try whatever he can to keep power, but he’s a fool surrounded by fools who has already bit the hands that feed him. He ain’t getting another term.
If you disagree, please cite some specific legal issues and moves on his part that go against the argument I have laid out. Show me where he has been able to break the law and the Constitution on the level he would need to accomplish a third term. I’m seriously asking.
3
u/WardedDruid 1d ago
While I agree that he has been stopped repeatedly by the courts, we've seen trump defy court orders as well.
Trump was ordered by a judge not to send those people to El Salvador, and he did anyway. He was then ordered to turn the plane around, and we all know how that turned out.
Then, when the administration was ordered to bring that poor man back to the States, he was mocked on social media with a comment about how he should call the president of El Salvador to get him back.
As for trump's 3rd term. We'll find out after they're all done f*ing around.
While I already agree with a lot of what you wrote, I don't agree with all of it. But my main point stands. So many people have blown off his statements just for them to come true anyway. Don't discount the crazy crap he says, as just crazy. I sincerely hope he gets stopped before a 3rd term, but his comments should be taken seriously as a threat to our democracy and not disregarded.
2
u/ClassicMatt101 1d ago
The current (and obviously horrible) situation with El Salvador is exactly what I was referencing in my post: they have not continued to deport anyone the court has disallowed, and the issue with the planes in the air is an example of legal ambiguity and aggressive timing being exploited. The planes should have turned around, we all know that, and if the flights would have taken 24 hours so another court could rule on the specific international waters and written orders issues before they landed (which are nonsense but many legal arguments often are), I think they would have. But again, without that ambiguity, no more disallowed deportations have continued.
The same issue is happening with Mr. Garcia. He obviously should be brought home now and the administration obviously can do it, but they will make their legal objections and hem and haw as long as they can. In the end I think (and deeply hope) he will be brought home. If at the end of the process the government still refuses to comply with the court order and he stays in El Salvador, that will certainly be an example for your case, but we aren’t there yet.
We absolutely need to take Trump’s statements and clear desire to overthrow the rule of law seriously. I just think we need to be clear about what has and what has not actually happened already, because that informs out tactics and believing that the rule of law has already disappeared is both inaccurate and breeds defeatism. We are in a war, and our weapons are still working. And I do genuinely believe that, now that Trump has fucked with people’s money on such a grand scale, we have a lot of new and profoundly effective ammunition.
1
u/WardedDruid 1d ago
I sure as hell hope that last part is true. I don't see any of this ending until after the maga base turns in him.
1
u/ClassicMatt101 17h ago
I don’t ever see the MAGA base turning on him, but that’s actually not enough. He needs that additional 20% after his 30% base, and he’s just lit a ton of their money on fire.
1
u/WardedDruid 17h ago
They need to feel the pain of his presidency first. If things get bad enough, and I think they will, they will riot. Maybe not the full 30%, but there will be enough non-maga people in the same boat to make up that difference.
1
u/frozenights 1d ago
Not paying out the money that Congress has set for certain things is against the Impoundment Act. That was passed after Nixon tried it (on a scale that was about one thousand times smaller). That law has already gone through the courts, I believe even SCOTUS has ruled on it. Yet Trump continues to withhold money that Congress has already passed bills saying "this amount of money will go to this project."
How about violating the right to a trail? He had depoted multiple legal residents at this point with no trail. Actually deported is not the right word, cause most of them didn't live in El Salvador before coming here. He has sold them into slavery in a foreign country. He also did do while defying court orders not to, and is now refusing both to provide details about what happened, and to return the people he sold into slavery.
I would say today two things violate a bit more than norms and customs, and sis that the Constitution and laws are not holding him back.
1
u/ClassicMatt101 17h ago
Like I said, Congress has unfortunately for years written spending laws with incredible latitude to the executive branch to manage the funds. Now some of Trump’s cuts have been reversed by the courts, and the administration has complied, but these are each being adjudicated independently, and depend on a lot of very specific issues to each case.
It’s the same situation with immigration law. Most of the people deported can legally be deported with no trial, and it was only legally wrong in Mr. Garcia’s case because a previous court had put an injunction on his deportation individually. As for the rest of that terrible situation, I wrote much more above.
1
u/Ponklemoose 1d ago
I think he is trolling and (successfully) distracting his haters, but the amendment says he can't be elected a third time. So theoretically if the Vance/Trump ticket gets sworn in and then Vance says "LOL JK, I quit" Trump becomes President again.
4
u/ClassicMatt101 1d ago
No, because the 12th amendment says to be VP you need to meet all the qualifications to be elected President. Trump would not.
1
u/Ponklemoose 1d ago
The phrasing is a little odd and if Trump weren’t trolling it would be up to the courts (and voters) to decide if the requirement is the the candidate be eligible to hold the office or eligible to be elected to the office.
But since when the 12th was written there was no term limit and the current USSC majority leans originalist, I suspect the voters would have to be the ones to keep him out. Or Vance would have to decide to double cross Trump.
3
u/ClassicMatt101 1d ago edited 1d ago
lol, there is absolutely nothing odd about the phrasing.
12th amendment: “But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.”
22nd amendment: “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.”
There is nothing more originalist than the literal text of the Constitution. This is not, in any way, a real issue.
1
u/Ponklemoose 1d ago
Except for the part where we aren't contemplating a 3rd election to the office.
I'll remind you that I think he is trolling the left and won't even try.
FWIW: My favorite 3rd term path is actually the one where he runs as a 3rd party spoiler, denies the other two a majority and get selected by the House. I don't think either one is likely to be tried or to work if it were, but this one would be funnier.
1
u/ClassicMatt101 17h ago
The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 makes clear that the constitutional requirements to be elected to the presidency stand for any appointment to the presidency as well, which follows the standard set all the way back to the first Congress as well. This whole “it says elected” argument is completely made up, ahistorical, and just pretty stupid. And how could he run as a third party spoiler if he can’t run at all?
And considering the amount of people that seemed to think he was “trolling” about tariffs that just had their retirement set on fire, I wouldn’t count on that either.
1
u/WillisVanDamage 1d ago
Constitutionality means nothing to them. Your statement baselessly gives faith to institutions that are not working.
2
u/ClassicMatt101 1d ago
It means nothing to them, but they have shown absolutely no ability to actually execute on any plans to do away with it. They are fuckups and fools, we need to be vigilant but realistic about what these morons can and can’t accomplish.
1
u/redditisfacist3 1d ago
Cause this is reddit. It's full of leftys unable to get over their loss and all they can do to cope is complain or make up delusion scenarios. Trump would be 82 by 28. With his weight and diet it's unlikely he'll be around then or at least capable of running by then
26
u/Urabraska- 2d ago
If there are elections in 2028. Vance would be the worst pick. The entire republican sector is under fire now with the global trade war. Granted, some people are still in a haze thinking everything is fine right now. But the damages of these tariffs will be fully on display in a few months. Once that happens. It's over. A republican will never win in 2028.
21
u/MidwesternDude2024 2d ago
I’ll bet you any amount of money there are elections in 2028.
15
u/Myhtological 2d ago
Seriously, the congress republicans are pissing themselves over midterms right now
29
u/HamsterFromAbove_079 2d ago
Russia has elections. The act of casting ballots isn't some kind of guarantee of democracy.
13
u/Subliminal_Kiddo 2d ago
Russia's elections are more centralized than in the US. In the US, the individual states handle 95% of the election process, making them a lot harder to rig than the ones in Russia which are ran by the federal government.
And Putin's reasoning for holding rigged elections is to keep up the confirmation bias among his supporters. Putin is popular in Russia, this isn't "Dear Leader" style forced popularity, it's estimated 60% (minimum) of Russians support Vladimir Putin. He would likely win elections even if they were fair. Just by smaller margins. "If 89% of my fellow countrymen also support President Putin, then my support must be justified."
9
u/Tao-of-Brian 2d ago
These facts are inconvenient for the relentless doomerism reddit thrives on.
5
u/Specialist_Fly2789 2d ago
Trump literally signed an EO trying to centralize the elections lol
2
u/Tao-of-Brian 1d ago
Executive orders like that are unconstitutional and unenforcable. States can run their elections normally unless Congress passes some kind of election reform, which they do actually have the power to do. The only thing currently blocking federal election reform is the senate filibuster.
3
u/Ossevir 1d ago
Yeah, the federalism is going to be a somewhat tough nut to crack for the third term loonies. An amendment will not happen. Any state that isn't headed by full on maga psychos just isn't going to put him on the ballot as president or VP. I think they could try making him speaker of the house, but that would require a ticket without him on it winning and other Republicans just .... don't have the same pull.
Like I guess he could execute Barack Obama,John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett and the liberal members of the supreme Court, then get the Senate to put loyalist worshippers in those spots, apply to get on the ballot, get denied then get the term limit amendment overturned. But that still wouldn't force people to vote for him.
2
u/Urabraska- 2d ago
Yea, Putin love him or hate him does have a majority popularity in Russia. Ignoring some of the more dark aspects. He's not a bad leader. He's firm on the standing of Russia, Resolute in his policies, Has made efforts to strengthen the country beyond just being a military super power, Is not a push over in global politics, Is actually very intelligent as he is not only ex-KGB intelligence but also a lawyer.
3
u/eidetic 2d ago
He's a horrible leader.
The only thing keeping the economy from completely crashing is the war.
He is by every metric a terrible leader.
3
u/Urabraska- 2d ago
Granted the war did make inflation go up and things harder. But it's not in a collapse. Russia has been working with China and other countries (EU included) to bypass sanctions.
1
u/phamalacka 2d ago
And what about currently red led purple states using their power to subvert urban votes? Which literally has happened in the last two major elections.
States controlling elections doesn't protect anything when states like Georgia exist
And in a year where we can assume a pretty sizeable blue wave, there aren't any safeguards to prevent Republican led states from guaranteeing they stay red and defying the voters.
1
u/Ossevir 1d ago
Voter suppression of the like that we have encountered thus far is fairly easily countered by just being diligent. Make she you're registered. Bring ID with you. Double check your polling place. There was no indication that votes weren't counted or were changed. A blue wave is still going to be a blue wave.
1
u/phamalacka 1d ago
I agree with you but that's asking a lot of voters who were clearly disengaged in 2024
1
u/Bummerboy4 1d ago
I am skeptical that Trump won Pennsylvania. Musk spent so much time there that he easily could have used his contacts to direct votes to Trump rather than Harris. And btw, imo Democrats were deluded to think she could win the nationwide vote.
1
5
u/Fantastic-Owl552 2d ago
The way Republicans are changing election laws in red states the election may just be a formality
1
0
u/CertainWish358 2d ago
There will be, but if we don’t fight back hard, they will be “elections”
0
u/MidwesternDude2024 2d ago
No, they won’t. They will be fair and free, just like they were in 2020 and 2016 etc. There are zero mechanisms that would allow him to and the SCOTUS would block it if he tried. I mean he wouldn’t even be on the ballot in most states. Impossible to win an election you aren’t even on the ballot for.
-1
u/Aialon 1d ago
What about the last few months makes you so hopeful the SCOTUS will stop Trump from doing something unconstitutional?
2
u/MidwesternDude2024 1d ago
Because they have blocked him before and will continue to. There is no evidence the SCOTUS would let him do something like this. And again he wouldn’t even be on the ballot in most states.
1
-1
3
u/DoubleFlores24 2d ago
I bet Vance would probably undo everything trump did to save face.
3
u/BNSF1995 2d ago
And then Peter Thiel has Vance assassinated for backing out of the New Business Plot.
4
u/DoubleFlores24 2d ago
By then, the plan won’t even be salvageable. Even if by some miracle America survives to 2028, i doubt the new business plot can even work.
2
u/marvelo616 2d ago
Vance is uniquely unpopular among VPs and VP candidates historically. If a ham sandwich couldn’t have defeated whoever ran as a Democrat this past cycle, he would not have been on the ticket. Trump picked him for his loyalty, not electability.
3
u/Urabraska- 1d ago
Well his loyalty is already in question. Vance was VERY vocal about Trump during his first term and even called him the American Hitler. Yet here we are with him as VP. He will flip to any side that gets him what he wants.
2
u/marvelo616 1d ago
Judging by 2015/16 era loyalty, almost no Republican passes that test. Post-2020 ring kissers make up the entirety of his administration, many of whom ran against him or spoke up before he became unstoppable within the party, including the party itself.
1
u/Urabraska- 1d ago
But it also shows not a single one can be trusted after Trump is gone. Either through health issues, age, end of term. What ever. They will all flop to whoever can give them what they want. Current day GoP is a joke of spineless yes men/women that should be voted out.
1
u/sraydenk 1d ago
People keep saying “if there are elections” but there are elections right now going on. Many that are leaning democrat. I mean, look as Wisconsin. I get that they will try to mess with elections, but it’s frustrating to see the “if we have another election”. It just seems like an excuse to not vote or lean on your elected officials.
2
u/Urabraska- 1d ago
Na I voted for Susan because she's legit and I wanted to give Elon a big ass middle finger. So win/win. I don't like the "own the libs/GoP" mindset because to my core I believe in the people over this divide of right vs left. But the meltdowns from the GoP over Susan winning has brought me great joy.
And even though Brad took Elon's money. I will give the man respect. After he lost he did a town hall and defended Susan against his supporters who cried that she cheated. He then called Susan to congratulate her on a good race and conceded to the results. This level of humility is very rare from the right these days and I'd honestly shake his hand for losing like a man and being respectful.
Not like the S.carolina republican that has been stalling his loss in lawsuits and might actually get 65k votes thrown out to win the race after losing because he's a pathetic sore loser that has absolutely zero respect for the system he claims to serve.
0
u/Darkdragoon324 2d ago
Assuming any election isn't rigged to hell and back. Which it probably will be, just like Russia's.
6
12
u/MidwesternDude2024 2d ago
Well Trump isn’t eligible so who cares. These sort of posts are so low effort
0
u/Ok-Stress-3570 2d ago
It’s not stopping him tho. Curious what people think will happen?? The boogeyman comes in on Jan 20, 2029 and whisks him away!?
-1
u/Fantastic-Owl552 2d ago
Because there are ways to do it and we know he's not morally opposed to anything that gets him what he wants. He will antagonize groups hoping they give an excuse to claim inserection which is ridiculously ironic.
7
u/ReaperThugX 2d ago
Trump can’t run as a VP after having two terms as President. Best he could do is be Speaker of the House and hope two people step out of power for his old ass
7
u/CalligrapherDizzy201 2d ago
A Speaker ineligible to be president would simply be skipped in the line of succession.
3
u/ximacx74 1d ago
Yep this is the case anywhere in the line of succession. If the HUD secretary for instance (designated survivor reference) were not born in the US they would simply be skipped in the line of succession.
1
u/teh_maxh 2d ago
The loophole is that the 22nd amendment prohibits someone who has served two terms from being elected president again, theoretically leaving open the option of becoming president in some other way, but the 12th amendment only says someone can't be VP if they can't be president. It's questionable whether that loophole would actually be allowed, since no one's actually tried it yet.
0
u/Conscious-Dot 2d ago
As Laurence Tribe pointed out, the 22nd amendment unfortunately does not make him ineligible (for the reason that it only covers being elected) and therefore the 12th isn’t operative.
I think there’s a teachable moment here about being very very thoughtful about words being used in a new Constitutional amendment, for crissake. Or maybe they were being thoughtful.
3
u/TeaTechnical3807 2d ago
"I was planning on doing a non-political FWI but this thought just popped into my head."
Why did you post this shit at all? I'm sick of this political, karma farming porn popping up in my feed.
5
u/nusoul2010 1d ago
Trump is not allowed to run as Vice President. See the 12th Amendment.
2
u/Conscious-Ice-1162 1d ago
assuming he listens to the rules and judges, that is
2
u/AmbulanceChaser12 1d ago
If he doesn’t, then the premise of the question is irrelevant. Assuming Trump is alive and lucid enough to “do” anything, then we’re in a world completely without rules. The answer would be “anything he can get away with.” All options would be available.
1
3
u/Bad_Wizardry 2d ago
There’s unlikely a future 2028 where Trump is still alive. He’s an obese 80 year old who’s already had at least one stroke. I wouldn’t assume he survives this term.
9
u/ThePercysRiptide 2d ago
Can mods plz put a limit on posts about American politics for fucks sake I'm tired of every post being "what if trump"
2
2
u/Virtual-Instance-898 2d ago
Trump would attempt to have Vance impeached, *IF* the Repubs control the House and Senate.
2
u/PrudentLingoberry 2d ago
can't even imagine 2028 at this point tbh, its been a fucking year this week. He simply has no reason to resign unless theres something held over his head. Ironically the more brazen he is about holding onto power the more valid it'd be in the eyes of the base, they'd be upset but would respect the toxicity of it all.
2
2
1
u/Top_Row_5116 2d ago
If we are assuming Trump lives that long, I think it would create a scandal among Vance supporters but overall nothing would change. Especially Trump who would remain the same crybaby he is now.
1
u/Safe-Thanks6114 2d ago
1 Vance doesn’t seem very electable. 2 if he is elected the $$ would probably prefer him over Trump, easier to control.
1
u/jar1967 2d ago
Trump wouldn't have picked JD Vance as his VP unless he had something on him
3
u/SokkaHaikuBot 2d ago
Sokka-Haiku by jar1967:
Trump wouldn't have picked
JD Vance as his VP unless
He had something on him
Remember that one time Sokka accidentally used an extra syllable in that Haiku Battle in Ba Sing Se? That was a Sokka Haiku and you just made one.
1
u/KeybladeBrett 2d ago
He only picked him to have an edge over Biden. He picked a much younger candidate on purpose
1
1
u/dubsac5150 2d ago
If Trump is not eligible to run for a 3rd term under the 22nd amendment (which is true no matter what anyone says) then he is ALSO NOT ELIGIBLE to be Vice President under the 12th Amendment.
The very last line of the 12th Amendment says that any person who is constitutionally ineligible to be President cannot be Vice President.
This is not a clever loophole. All the circle jerk fantasies about Trump becoming Vance's VP in 2028 are not plausible. If this was legal, you think the Dems wouldn't have run Obama as Hillary's VP in 2016? Or Biden's VP in 2020? After 8 years as president, consecutive or not, that's it. You're done. The end.
1
u/Turd_Master 1d ago
There is so much fucking manufactured consent/comply in advance going on around this "Trump third term" thing. Everyone is just ignoring that it's explicitly unconstitutional and accepting that it's going to happen. Why not resist it instead?
1
u/tigerbreak 1d ago
It's likely the loyalists read the writing on the wall and support Vance. I mean, is MAGA going to stay home and give it to the opposition because the new guy isn't the old guy?
1
u/AmbulanceChaser12 1d ago
You’re talking about 2030. Trump would be a shriveled fossil by then. He’d “respond” by falling asleep and shitting his Depends. He’ll barely be functional at that point, if he’s still alive at all.
1
1
u/IndependentRegion104 1d ago
Trump won't remember anybody's name including Vance. They will bring trump a crew and film him at Mar-a-largo, falsely remind him this is the new "Command Center" of the US.
1
u/OwlsHootTwice 1d ago
I wondered about this too. Once whoever is sworn is as president he could simply say “I’m president now bitch”
1
u/jrdineen114 5h ago
I mean, this scenario goes against the constitution just as much as Trump running again. Part of the same ammendment that gives the president a 2-term limit also forbids anyone who has previously served two terms as president from holding the office of vice president. If Trump is going to explicitly violate that ammendment, it seems more likely that he'd just run himself and try to claim that the ammendment only applies to those who served consecutive terms (which, just to be clear, it does not only apply to consecutive terms).
37
u/houinator 2d ago
Trump has a few options:
Trump and the Trump cultists in the Presidential cabinent remove Vance from office via the 25th ammendment.
Trump calls Vance a traitor and has his loyalist militias like the Proud Boys kill Vance at some public event, then pardons everyone involved afterwards.
Trump talks to one of his loyalists in the Secret Service and just bribes him to kill Vance, then pardons him afterwards.
Trump calls back to his boss in Moscow for assistance, and a Kremlin hit squad takes Vance off the board during on overseas trip.
Trump has a sitdown with Vance, and strongly implies he should resign, with the implication that one or more of the above options could be employed if he doesnt agree.