I think we're very nearly there, and this could be the tipping point based on how things shake out. If we take Trump et al at their word, then the US economy is going to violently shudder under the weight of unreasonable tariffs, mass deportations, tax cuts on the obscenely wealthy, and a ramming through of unpopular policies that he proclaims (absent evidence) will fix a given problem. The man is a salesman, and he's good at selling lies to the desperate.
So what happens if he goes so far that the United States loses or jeopardizes its global dominance? The same states that voted heavily for him would be the first impacted, with massive job losses and higher costs. Coastal states and cities wouldn't be too far behind, with higher costs tempered somewhat by proximity to logistics hubs, and unemployment would be more limited due to the higher concentration of jobs. That is, until our economic dominance falters, at which point our heavily-built-up services industry is likely to fracture and collapse in on itself under the weight of competition from countries like India and China.
All of which is to say that, yes, it's a potential outcome that the United States does dissolve in some fashion, as some states seek to preserve their power and economic control even as the Federal Government loses its mind.
Now then, do I personally think this is the outcome? No, not really. We lack debt to spend frivolously on deficit financing, so there goes that easy out. The stock market is not the economy, and workers will quickly realize that when stocks skyrocket and they're all laid off 2008-style, which would be bad for those with the most to gain (billionaires and Private Equity). I still think there's enough backstops in place to prevent runaway collapse and dissolution...
...although the biggest one of all is a divided Congress. If the GOP gets a trifecta (Executive, both Legislative chambers, and SCOTUS), then there's nothing stopping the full suite of plans from being implemented post-haste, at which point the music very suddenly stops and everyone realizes how screwed we are. Our prior backstops, our allied countries, cannot be depended upon with a President that is vocally supportive of Russia and while they're dealing with their own populism issues.
All in all, my read is that while things are about to get really bad, they're not likely to be maximum bad, if that makes sense. The current world order has always been fragile post-Cold War, and this might be the time for a grand realignment. It'd be a shame to lose our dominance, but no empire lasts forever.
While this seems like a fairly rapid doom and gloom scenario if you think about it in the context of a single term, one has to wonder about what happens in 4 years. He had no problem trying to subvert previous elections. With all branches of government falling in line, it seems like he'll have plenty of time to do as he pleases. So I don't think this is all that far fetched if we look at it as a decade or two process. Obviously he'll die at some point but I imagine he'd appoint a similar successor.
But Americans knew this because of Jan 6, so it's what we deserve I guess.
With now full control of the government, it is trivial for him to have the supreme court overturn the 22nd amendment and rig a third election. Absolutely trivial.
I hope you're right and I hope I'm wrong. I don't think it'll be an outright repeal of the 22nd amendment, but it'll instead be some sort of cheeky way around it using "emergency powers" and gray areas in the courts, because we saw how easily the supreme Court will ignore precedent if it helps their guy. Or maybe it'll just be a subverted election and passing the torch to one of his buddies.
Or maybe it'll be a regular, peaceful transition of power in 4 years. But I absolutely wouldn't bet on that.
The Supreme Court can't repeal amendments. Amendments can only be repealed through the amendment process, which requires the approval of 2/3 of House and Senate + 3/4 of State legislatures.
It is true that the Supreme Court has wide latitude in interpreting the Constitution. But I don't see the Court interpreting "No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice" in any other way than what the plain text says.
GP already said that it won’t happen via repealing the amendment. So pointing out how difficult that is/should be isn’t a strong point.
> But I don't see the Court interpreting "No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice" in any other way
Simple… He wont be elected.
He’ll be appointed. Or some other word. Or elections will be suspended due to some “national emergency” and so “we’ll just continue with who we have right now in the interim”. This is not uncommon when democracies fall to authoritarianism.
The Republicans, and their courts and judges, have already amply demonstrated how disingenuous they’re willing to be.
The 14th amendment disqualifies people who have “previously taken an oath to support the Constitution.”
The Republican position is that Trump swore an oath to “preserve, protect, and defend” the Constitution, but the word “support” was not in there so it doesn’t apply.
If it helps, I would expect a peaceful transition of power in less than three years - from the President to the Vice President upon his death, at which point yes, I fully expect two full terms of Vance provided he doesn’t screw up this initial one by getting caught up in the chaotic fracas of the inner cabinet. The American People made it clear that they demand the sacrifice of “others” for their personal wealth, and that’s the agenda for the remainder of the decade.
That being said, I can’t say how outside forces could shape things in unexpected ways. A proper WW3 with China and Russia could devastate enough of the world that countries with large immigrant populations end up the new superpowers, isolated from global conflicts and with the population for large projects, quickly. Or it might not. There’s so many potential branches when the status quo fails or is destroyed, that our only reliable sources of data come from those who lived it before us - lived through WW1 and WW2, who witnessed the Holocaust, who resisted fascism and totalitarianism from within and without.
I hope this is a crisis we manage to navigate largely peacefully, educating our masses about a better future together and form a new, achievable American Dream for them to chase. I want us to stop debating ideology in echo chambers, and instead put in the hard work of teaching, and guiding, and helping our fellow man. Pull the socialists, and the communists, and the modern economic theorists, and all the “fringe” groups out of their fortresses and into the streets, exchanging ideas with one another and formulating a real path forward that recognizes we will all have to compromise something to achieve our goal of a better, brighter, more sustainable future together.
I see it more like this: Trump leaves office in four years, but puts his weight behind Vance winning the 2028 election, and remains "the power behind the throne" like he was for the Republican Party for the last four years. He's going to expect Vance to take his orders. (Vance, and everyone else in the Republican Party.)
So what happens if he goes so far that the United States loses or jeopardizes its global dominance? The same states that voted heavily for him would be the first impacted, with massive job losses and higher costs. Coastal states and cities wouldn't be too far behind, with higher costs tempered somewhat by proximity to logistics hubs, and unemployment would be more limited due to the higher concentration of jobs. That is, until our economic dominance falters, at which point our heavily-built-up services industry is likely to fracture and collapse in on itself under the weight of competition from countries like India and China.
All of which is to say that, yes, it's a potential outcome that the United States does dissolve in some fashion, as some states seek to preserve their power and economic control even as the Federal Government loses its mind.
Now then, do I personally think this is the outcome? No, not really. We lack debt to spend frivolously on deficit financing, so there goes that easy out. The stock market is not the economy, and workers will quickly realize that when stocks skyrocket and they're all laid off 2008-style, which would be bad for those with the most to gain (billionaires and Private Equity). I still think there's enough backstops in place to prevent runaway collapse and dissolution...
...although the biggest one of all is a divided Congress. If the GOP gets a trifecta (Executive, both Legislative chambers, and SCOTUS), then there's nothing stopping the full suite of plans from being implemented post-haste, at which point the music very suddenly stops and everyone realizes how screwed we are. Our prior backstops, our allied countries, cannot be depended upon with a President that is vocally supportive of Russia and while they're dealing with their own populism issues.
All in all, my read is that while things are about to get really bad, they're not likely to be maximum bad, if that makes sense. The current world order has always been fragile post-Cold War, and this might be the time for a grand realignment. It'd be a shame to lose our dominance, but no empire lasts forever.