• nxn@biglemmowski.win
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    IMO, the current administration is the biggest threat to democracy in the history of this nation, and right now its PR is being lead by a clown that paints his face orange each morning.

    The right wants him replaced just as much as the left – and preferably quickly enough that Vance might get 3 terms. So be careful what you wish for, because right now Trump is actually doing a phenomenal job of fueling outrage over project 2025 agendas. Someone with more intellect will be better able to mask their radical nature.

    • hyperhopper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      He would at most get 2.49999 terms. You have not read the 22nd amendment. You can’t get 3 terms aside from repeatedly being elected as VP and the primary president losing office 4+ times.

        • hyperhopper@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          This is a situation that implies he is either impeached , resigned, or dead, so I’m not sure what his interpretation has to do with this conversation

            • hyperhopper@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              I do not think any of the 3 that I mentioned are likely. But that is the world view the parent comment assumes, and my comment is just continuing his assumption but showing why his extrapolations are incorrect

      • nxn@biglemmowski.win
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I said “3 terms” because his timespan in office would exceed the expected ~8 year limit of the 2 term cycle. But, before you reply, I do understand your logic, so please don’t.

  • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    Oh wow, what’s the worst that could happen, they skip safety and defense features and the plane gets shot down and the president killed? Oh man, that would be horrible, just horrible!

      • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        16 hours ago

        As liberals are the other half of the same coin, they are responsible for at least half the horrible shit that happens in the country. Why not give them the blame for killing the president though, it could be the one useful thing they do in the last several years!

          • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Hey, you guys enshrined abortion rights into law, since you had the chance and promised to do it, right? No? Well, at the very least you didn’t use the police to brutalize anti-genocide protesters, right? No? Well, at the very least, you’re standing up to Trump and opposing his Project 2025, right?

            No?

            • stetech@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 hours ago

              Which of those things did the aforementioned non-white christians [they probably meant non-christians, but whatever] cause specifically?

              Edit: Did 100% of the people in those groups cause this?

        • Ledericas@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 hours ago

          how so? all of it was caused by solely republicans, and what did we cause? DEI wokeness? those are all conservative inventions.

  • DaddleDew@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yes, please, let Musk take control of the project and cut all the corners and ignore regulation to rush production on something that could kill the president and his entire entourage if it ever fails. Please do it!

  • xenomor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    ·
    16 hours ago

    trump killing himself by using Musk to skirt safety precautions so he can feel special riding around in a shiny new ego tube might be enough to get me wondering if god exists.

  • IhaveCrabs111@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    24 hours ago

    Isn’t musk too busy taking credit for being the ceo of Tesla? And space x and the boring company, solar city, oh yeh and twitter. Oh and wasn’t he supposed to be going through every social security payment? How will he find the time to jerk off on twitter while fixing Air Force one and all the faa safety standards. He must really be a genius (hardest fucking sigh in the universe)

  • tal@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I mean, realistically, we would probably be just fine with Air Force One having no security systems at all. Like, the likelihood that someone is going to attack Air Force One probably isn’t all that high, and you can also mitigate that by choosing where to fly the thing.

    And as long as Trump understands any risk that he exposes himself to…I mean, it’s not as if a future President is required to use the Trump-era Air Force One. It’s really just him and people during his administration.

    Most national leaders don’t have anything like the kind of protection that the President does.

    Now, granted, most also haven’t had four assassination attempts against them be intercepted in past months, but I’m also not sure that shooting down Air Force One is the easiest way to assassinate the President, either.

    EDIT: And I think that it’s also worth considering that some of our norms for modern Presidential travel were developed during the Cold War, in an era of potential nuclear conflict where launch-on-warning was part of nuclear doctrine. In that scenario, the President needs to travel around with the nuclear football, and a decapitation strike might be an important early first move in a nuclear war.

    But we haven’t relied on launch-on-warning for a long time. The President is a lot more expendable in the context of dealing with an opposing nuclear first strike today; it’s the SLBM arsenal used to counter that now.

    Today, if a hostile state kills the President, it might produce disruption for a short period…but that disruption probably isn’t going to buy all that much, strategically.

    • capital_sniff@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      I always thought Air Force One needed security to prevent terrorists from taking the president hostage and forcing them to release more terrorists. But, our current president already lets a bunch of terrorists go like the Taliban and Jan Sixers.

    • ubergeek@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 day ago

      Today, if a hostile state kills the President, it might produce disruption for a short period…but that disruption probably isn’t going to buy all that much, strategically.

      Can’t possibly be any more disruption than what the current president is causing… So I’d call it a win if he was taken out.

    • Jericho_Kane@lemmy.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Most politicians are fine riding a bicycle to work, ride a train or a normal car, just fly a normal ass airline, things like that. But americans need them to ride in a tank because they love to kiss the feet of their celebrity overloards. I mean putin obviously can’t or kim jong-un can’t which says a lot.