566

President Donald Trump threatened to veto every piece of legislation put forward during the second half of his administration if Democrats flip control of the House or Senate during next month’s midterm elections.

“Well, I think the Republicans are going to win. But if there was, you call it gridlock, what happens is I veto everything,” Trump told reporters Friday morning while speaking on the South Lawn. “And then the Democrats come and they want to make a deal. So we’ll work it out.”

Historical precedent and polling data suggest Democrats are on the cusp of flipping at least the House next month and possibly the Senate, due to public frustration over the Iran war and high costs of living.

So, they will override his veto

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] orlyowl@piefed.ca 68 points 1 week ago

So, they will override his veto

I will be giddy if Dems win enough seats to have the 2/3 of both house and senate it takes to do so.

[-] leadore@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

There aren't even enough open seats for them to win that many.

[-] bookmeat@fedinsfw.app 2 points 6 days ago

If they do that, don't they then also have enough power to impeach?

[-] orlyowl@piefed.ca 4 points 6 days ago

The key part to impeachment is the vote to convict. That's where his prior impeachments failed. In my fantasy where they had 2/3 of both houses they could do it, sure, but my comment was kinda joking - I'm not sure there are enough seats up for election in this cycle for them to get to that point even if they won everything.

[-] DamoclesDurden@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 days ago

He’s been impeached three times already. It doesn’t carry any weight anymore.

[-] HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca 69 points 1 week ago

If that happens and sticks (and he is removed from the presidency), come back to this comment and I will send you $1,000. No joke.

I'm not worried. But I promise I will honour this.

[-] orlyowl@piefed.ca 23 points 1 week ago
[-] darvocet@infosec.pub 7 points 1 week ago

There's a negative chance of this happening. So most likely you owe him 1,000. I don't know how that's possible but I'm certain of it.

[-] Pegajace@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Dems would have to win all but two of the thirty-three 2026 Senate races to reach 67 votes (including independents). I wouldn't hold my breath.

[-] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago

Assuming no Republicans cross the aisle. That's a fairly reasonable assumption today because the Republican party has been purged of anyone who would be willing to cross Trump.

But I suspect that assumption might not remain so valid if we were to see the kind of blue tsunami it would take to get anywhere near 2/3 of the Senate. Even if you only had 64 seats instead of 67, that still means almost every state went blue, including most of the deep red ones. Any politician with basic survival instincts is going to recognize that tying themselves to the lame duck president that has practically destroyed their party is not going to be a good long term strategy.

It's not much more plausible a scenario than one where Dems win a full supermajority, but if it were to happen, I would be shocked if every single Republican chose to go down with the ship.

[-] obviouspornalt@fedinsfw.app 2 points 6 days ago

all of the senators are so old that I bet a lot of them don't give a shit about long term strategy

[-] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

Being older than dirt doesn't seem to stop them from trying to get reelected.

[-] Zedstrian@sopuli.xyz 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

54 seats is the current upper bound of projections for the Democrats in the Senate, let alone 67. Even the moderately Republican-favoring Senate races of South Carolina, Florida, and Nebraska additionally all going blue—currently unlikely—would only take it to 57.

Perhaps enough to prevent a filibuster on contentious issues with enough bipartisan support, but not enough to overturn a veto in most cases.

[-] adarza@lemmy.ca 5 points 6 days ago

you also need the super-majority in the house for veto overrides.

it's actually 'easier' to impeach and convict a president than it is to override one of their vetoes.

[-] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

Right, I wasn’t saying this was a realistic scenario. Just saying that the minimum number of seats they would have to have is not necessarily the same as the number of votes.

[-] xtr0n@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 week ago

They get a 2/3 majority but it depends on John Fetterman. A finger on the monkey’s paw curls …

[-] obviouspornalt@fedinsfw.app 4 points 6 days ago

my bet is that democrats pick up +3 seats and fetterman decides to either caucus with the Republicans or at minimum threaten to spoil every vote.

this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2026
566 points (99.1% liked)

politics

31633 readers
2587 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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 3 years ago
MODERATORS