What If Trump resigns or is Removed From Office?

Right now, I can't think of anyone who hasn't been drowned out by the noise. I do notice Susan Collins has at least not felt obliged to march to the administration tune. I wouldn't mind knowing more about her.

If he resigns or is removed, (which given the current Senate is highly unlikely), whoever is the VP. Currently that's the creature with no eye-filling Satan's Spawn. Mike Pence. There have been murmurings that Pence might be shoved aside for a woman as a way to get more votes.

Pence would have to come up with some magic to snag a 2020 nomination. There seems to me a good chance it would be somebody we haven't been thinking about.

I can't see him resigning. Legal jeopardy awaits and it will have teeth. Plus I doubt that he would do it for psychological reasons.

But, of course, resigned or removed, the VP then moves in.

Come next November, the religious right would choose Pence in an instant. Likewise the Koch crowd (he was the one they wanted). Most of the base too would climb on board with little hesitation (though they'd miss all that owning-the-libs fireworks).

The only thing I think might prove a problem for Pence would be if early polling suggested a pretty clear electoral debacle. Then (please excuse my hobby-horse) I'd fear a Liz Cheney candidacy. She'd pull the right together and she'd be a formidable opponent.

Now I'm depressed. I didn't even think about the War Criminal's daughter.

I'm really hoping there is something presently not visible to me that would block her moving forward but I don't know what that would be. Oddly (at least to me) I have seen literally no one speaking about her in this context except for myself. I don't know if that has any significance.

I don't think I would go hunting with her.

Prefer to keep your face free of bullet wounds?

LOL! Not really.



That's true. He's a fighter. He'll keep defending himself from these unjust charges.

No. In some sort of implausible scenario where Trump is removed and Pence is the president, Pence will get the nomination and win the election.

And since Pence will have only been president for a fraction of a term, this will not count against his term limits. He'll be the first president since FDR to serve for more than eight years.

But this is kind of a silly thread. Trump will be our president until 2025.

hardy har har, giggle, guffaw.........hahahahahabahhahahahahahahahahHAhahhahahahahahahahahjahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hardy har har. I'm all out of gas, bless you for providing me such a giggle-fest.😎

Your response led me to make his post visible. Yikers.

I think Romney might take another shot at it. He really hasn't sullied himself with Trump and he could sell it as a return to normalcy. Assuming Warren is the opponent, he could also pull in Wall Street. They would be perfect foils for each other.

That makes sense only if one disregards how the GOP base voters think about Romney. Does the Romney family, do you, want to once again put such stress and worry on Rafalka? Hasn't that poor beast been through enough?

What legal jeopardy? They got 0.

Seeing as Trump always fancied himself as an Emperor lets treat him as such. So if he's kicked out of office we should exile him.
I was thinking the moon, we could get Space Force to drop him up there.

Over time he could become a scary story you could tell your kids, the Moon Moron will get you.

Don't you think children should be involved in politics? Sounds like indoctrination, then they can be exploited for things they are told is bad.

I would certainly fear the moon moron if I was a child.

The question is what GOP president would the Democrats work with if he or she wasn't authorized by the deep state? It seems that Trump is a wildcard that can't be trusted to play into predictable patterns that satisfy all the global corporate planning that relies on certain policies, which is one reason he is systematically attacked.

So assuming the GOP stands behind that approach to independent decision-making, I don't think there is any other president who could satisfy the Democrats' interest in having someone who will play into global political-economic expectations/demands.

Plus the Democrats generally profit from construing any and every GOP politician as an enemy of social justice, and they fancy flexing their civil disobedience tactics as a bottom-up disruption response to GOP governance.

Ironically, when they get a Democrat in the White House, they favor top-down/structuralist governance, but of course it is with the goal of securing everyone's economic positions/privilege and forcing growth and job-creation. . . or rather I should say they create/protect jobs for their protected/privileged classes, which in turn pushes those who aren't protected/privileged to hustle for the stimulus money as it circulates.

My favorite example was in AOC's Green New Deal where instead of simply having prohibitions/reductions for things like driving, air-travel, heating/cooling, meat, etc.; she wanted to pay people in certain minority categories to have local round-table discussions about how to invest in green progress. That would most likely result in wasteful half-baked quasi-solutions to unsustainability that would be heralded on talk-shows as being democratically chosen 'by the people,' and the tax-spend approach to funding them would pay out loads of money to developers/engineers/etc. who would then go spend their money on cars/driving, air travel, shopping in big heated/cooled retail stores, and otherwise support traditional unsustainable business models.

Those businesses, in turn, would be reinvesting the money on remodeling with the latest energy/climate-control systems, solar panels, etc. but there would be nominal reforestation efforts and no reductions in driving/pavement as the emphasis would be on replacing combustion vehicles with EVs, which still cause land-waste because everyone drives around in their own vehicle instead of using transit and living in walkable communities that eliminate the need for motorized transportation altogether.

So you would end up with boom/growth in industrial economic development, greenwashed to justify it in the name of climate reform. CO2 emissions would not decrease as much as they could, and reforestation would be nominal. Much of the stimulus money would be filtered by clever grant-writers into projects that fail to achieve real sustainability; and in a few years the economy would be booming and people who care about climate would be asking again why CO2 levels are still going up and still more land being cleared to build new subdivisions, retail outlets, office space, highways, deforested solar farms, etc.