this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2023
388 points (98.0% liked)

politics

19104 readers
3408 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
all 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Someonelemmy@lemmynsfw.com 153 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Right, this is why we fought a war to get rid of the monarchy.

[–] waigl@lemmy.world 68 points 11 months ago (5 children)

Ever since Donald Trump was elected, I always had the impression that he just doesn't properly understand that being elected president is a fundamentally different thing from being crowned king.

[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 52 points 11 months ago

I’ll go one better, I think a plurality of Americans think similarly to this

[–] Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.world 32 points 11 months ago (2 children)

The whole leader != ruler thing seems to trip up a lot of people on the right.

[–] TechyDad@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

To be fair, there seem to be many on the left that don't get this either. I've seen people insisting that they won't vote for Biden again because he didn't enact a long list of Progressive desires.

They completely ignore that Biden can't just singlehandedly declare new laws. He needs things to get through Congress. Then, he can pass them, but they can be overturned by the Supreme Court. With the 50-50 split Senate and the Republican controlled House, it's difficult to get much passed. With the conservative Supreme Court, it's hard to keep things from getting overturned.

If Biden had large Democratic majorities in the House/Senate/Supreme Court, then perhaps there would be a valid criticism, but even then blame wouldn't be focused on Biden alone.

[–] bquintb@midwest.social 1 points 11 months ago

You mean losers dont understand power.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago

He didn't want it to be a fundamentally different thing, so he did everything he could to eliminate all differences.

[–] Nobody@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago

“Terrorists in Boston dumping perfectly good British tea in the harbor. In my day we knew what to do with traitors to the crown. Many such cases in our colonial carnage. Tell good king George to make me royal governor!”

[–] gmtom@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

Except over 100 years before the war of Independance you had the trial of King Charles I, where thr Britjsh Parliament made a point that not even Kings were above the law.

[–] andrewrgross@slrpnk.net 75 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children)

What a crazy legal defense. 'Your honor, I'd like to dismiss these charges because I privately unilaterally decided while president that silently dissolving the the Constitution, usurping all powers of the other branches of government and asserting the divine right of kings is actually an unenumerated presidential power, which I secretly exercised three years ago but only decided to reveal now. Anyway, because of this, I'm actually the presiding officer in this court. Case dismissed.'

Obviously, I'm aware that it's just a delay tactic, but even so, it's truly bonkers.

[–] Godnroc@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago

Have you ever watched the Air Bud movies? They say things like "well there's no rule that says a dog can't play basketball." A lot of things are like that, unless there is someone to say "yeah, but if you do that we're picking up the ball and leaving" or the better "yeah, but if you try we'll pick you up and throw you out."

[–] Zane@aussie.zone 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

"I'm the boss, now you're fired. How's that for a fantasy, my friend?"

[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

It takes 6 to tango

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 2 points 11 months ago

That’s actually what the prime minister did in Australia during Covid. He took all the power, secretly.

[–] mrbubblesort@kbin.social 36 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Stupid senile Brandon is at it again, spouting stupid bullshit. Everyone knows if you don't want to be criminally prosecuted you need to put an (R) next to your name. The rule of law only applies to Democrats.

[–] HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social 4 points 11 months ago

Well yes, Democrats get rule of law. Republicans get law and order, which is usually existing systems of power to effect maintenance of existing social hierarchies and oppress the outgroup. It's all very clear.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 27 points 11 months ago (2 children)

That's great, but unless you codify it, it's not exactly binding or even guiding (like past legal precedent).

[–] LanternEverywhere@kbin.social 14 points 11 months ago

There's no reason to codify it because it's a like proving a negative. Unless a law exists saying that a president can't be prosecuted, then that automatically means he can be prosecuted.

[–] TigrisMorte@kbin.social 6 points 11 months ago

Can be and shall be are two different things.

[–] Vortieum@sopuli.xyz 1 points 11 months ago

What no one is asking: What's the first illeal thing Biden should do to Trump if Trump were to win this argument?