this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2026
902 points (99.6% liked)

politics

29384 readers
2605 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jeffep@lemmy.world 5 points 2 hours ago

Hilarious how everyone here complains they take the (slow) bureaucratic route.

This is a political party and that's how they can act.

If you want fast results, take it to the streets. Kicking him out outside of bureaucratic procedures is everyone's responsibility, not specifically the elected parties

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 7 points 2 hours ago

Congress has the power to create a commission to exercise the power to remove a mentally unfit president from office. The biggest worry is that this would inevitably be politicized. I say, let it happen! Let it be political. Let's have an openly political "mental health commission" that will rule that being a member of the opposite political party is a mental illness. Hell, let it become a formality. It will simply be expected that the president will be removed from office after a change in Congressional control. Whenever a change in control of Congress happens, the new Congressional leadership will stuff it with political ideologues. And they'll inevitably rule a president of the opposing party to be mentally unfit. Eventually it just becomes a formality, no one even considers it unusual. We just expect the presidency to be able to flip every two years. And we giggle that it has to be done by formally declaring the previous guy to be crazy. I think this would be a good idea.

Why? Because this would effectively transform the US into a Parliamentary democracy. A simple majority in both houses of Congress would be enough to install a new president. They effectively become a Prime Minister at that point. Parliamentary democracies have proven much more resilient to strong-man dictatorial takeover. It's not as perfect a solution as amending the constitution to formally remove the office of president entirely, but it would be a decent hack to do something similar. And going to a Parliamentary system isn't a magic cure-all, but it does have quite a bit of merit. As a plus, we would have the bonus of being "that nation that regularly declares its former leaders legally crazy." And you know what? I think that works well with America's energy.

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Wasting more funds and time. Gear up for the elections, select the proper candidates who are younger and healthier, get rid of the old shitbags and re-take the executive, administrative and judicial branches. Then prosecute the fuck out of every corrupt MAGA turd. If you clowns let them get away with it again, shame on you.

[–] DylanMc6@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

It's gonna take a lot of effort trying to get democratic socialists into office. That day that happens will be the day a blue corn moon occurs . I really hope the DSA gets a huge boost if they wanna put their place in Congress.

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

+1...Fully agree!

[–] BrazenSigilos@ttrpg.network 7 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

I co-chaired the committee that reviewed the recommendation to revise the color of the book that regulation's in... We kept it grey!"

Bureaucratic babbel at it's finest.

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 2 points 2 hours ago

".... We kept it grey" was such a powerful line though.

[–] DylanMc6@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 hours ago
[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 14 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Jesus Christ just go for impeachment. If you can 25th, you can impeach. What a waste of time.

[–] ramenshaman@lemmy.world 7 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Is impeachment much better? He's been impeached twice already, what did that accomplish?

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

That's because they didnt get the 2/3 in the Senate they needed to remove him. But they need that 2/3 to 25th him... So yeah.

Plus if they 25th he can just write a letter saying he is competent and resume being president whenever he wants.

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 6 points 3 hours ago

they may get 2/3 if those Republicans on the fence feel like they have a good excuse to throw him under the bus. Their insane base might still vote for them if they say "we had to he was really sick" instead of "we had to he's breaking things you don't give a fuck about"

It's politics.

[–] m3t00@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago

just ask him

[–] KindnessIsPunk@lemmy.ca 28 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (23 children)

Has anyone noticed that the "both sides are the same so don't bother voting" crowd have tripled efforts since we neared another important election time frame, funny how that happens.

Especially pitching that in the face of Hungary's recent transition.

[–] DisgruntledGorillaGang@reddthat.com 7 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I have not noticed that, no.

[–] KindnessIsPunk@lemmy.ca 8 points 7 hours ago (4 children)

Consider this your notification then

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
[–] stylusmobilus@aussie.zone 4 points 5 hours ago

Swing that lettuce leaf. Get Hakeem Jeffries and his flexible spine to do it

[–] m3t00@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago

so getting around to thinking about it. hope committee might finally distract from all that epstein horror

[–] Cantaloupe@lemmy.fedioasis.cc 2 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

I ain't looking forward to the next candidate so trump getting ousted is not much of a W.

[–] motruck@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe we should welcome that though? Shouldn't we the people be able to kick out any president that isn't doing what the majority expect? Other countries seem to do this fine. Time for the USA to exercise that approach. Bring on the bad ones, we'll kick them all out.

[–] tomkatt@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Bring on the bad ones, we’ll ~~kick them all out~~ not vote for them.

Come on, let's at least try to be a bit proactive next time, eh? Nobody wants to go through this bullshit again.

[–] Dearth@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

If trump is removed under the 25th then Vance is potus.

[–] Yuccagnocchiyaki@lemmy.world 13 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

"We are going to file a request to create a vote in order to create a commission, that can create a petition to allow us to file the article to vote on whether or not we can impeach the seditious, blackmailed. child raping, human trafficker that sold out our country".

The rules are pretty hilarious at this point.

They REALLY WANT HIM GONE GUYS

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ragnar_ok@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

he's going to ace it! it'll be the best 25th amendment commission they've ever seen! Maybe even the most they've ever seen, who knows? lots of people were saying "wow you aced it mr president"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›