Red Mosquito

he's sitting peacefully there....

wease wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:

Superblood Wolfmoon wrote:Obama is going to the Supreme Court, not VP. The VP pick needs to be someone who can transition the party to the next generation.

OPRAH

Michelle/Oprah would win so yugely.

The democrats would never let Michelle Obama to be a candidate.

All this talk about finding an overshadowingly popular VP pick is just another manifestation of an electoral insecurity that is, frankly, embarrassing.

Donald Trump is 12 points underwater (with even worse favorability). His own polling shows him losing key swing states, and barely hanging on in other places that shouldn’t even be at risk.

The consistency and volume with which he would have to present a more inviting, less exhausting style of leadership between now and November in order to win is so far beyond him, not even his allies pretend to believe it. The Republican Party expects to lose the Senate.

If you’re the Democratic Party nominee, you don’t need more “popularity” at this point. You need more and more demonstrating that you’re not like the opposition. Clinging to figureheads or empowering celebrities is the worst choice you could make. Pick a capable political policy manager, because that’s what Joe Biden isn’t...and when you win the White House and Senate...you’re going to need a party-level leader who can do that.

Superblood Wolfmoon wrote:

wease wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:

Bammer wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:Just read an article in the New Yorker and I agree with it. Biden should pick Obama as his running mate. Trump = guaranteed done.

Michelle?

Barack

Barack can’t be Veep. The constitution clearly states he can’t be President again and they can’t put him in the position that might make that possible.

I'm not so sure about that. Wouldn't it would just mean that if the president died/resigned/whatever, he'd be skipped over in the chain? He can't serve as president, but that doesn't disqualify him from serving as VP.

Yeah the language says you can't be elected president for a third term. It doesn't state you can't become it if you are vice president and something happens. Not sure how it would all hold up in court though.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

Superblood Wolfmoon wrote:

wease wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:

Bammer wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:Just read an article in the New Yorker and I agree with it. Biden should pick Obama as his running mate. Trump = guaranteed done.

Michelle?

Barack

Barack can’t be Veep. The constitution clearly states he can’t be President again and they can’t put him in the position that might make that possible.

I'm not so sure about that. Wouldn't it would just mean that if the president died/resigned/whatever, he'd be skipped over in the chain? He can't serve as president, but that doesn't disqualify him from serving as VP.

Yeah the language says you can't be elected president for a third term. It doesn't state you can't become it if you are vice president and something happens. Not sure how it would all hold up in court though.

It also says you can’t run for VP if you are constitutionally ineligible to be president. Obama is ineligible to be president again.

Oh I know. I've just seen a lot of legal scholars argue that the way the language is, they feel there would be a case to making it work.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:Oh I know. I've just seen a lot of legal scholars argue that the way the language is, they feel there would be a case to making it work.

chris h2?

Here's a basic summary of stuff I've seen in the argument for:

"Again we bump into some problems of literalness, though, because some would argue that a person who has already run up against the limits of the 22nd Amendment isn’t “constitutionally ineligible” to be President (i.e., that person doesn’t fail to meet one or more of the requirements specified in Article II of the constitution, such as being at least 35 years old or a natural-born citizen of the United States) but is merely constitutionally ineligible to be elected President. Under this interpretation, a former two-term President would still be eligible, under the law, to obtain and hold the office of Vice President through election or appointment to that position.

Chris_H_2 wrote:

Bammer wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:Just read an article in the New Yorker and I agree with it. Biden should pick Obama as his running mate. Trump = guaranteed done.

Michelle?

Barack

They call it the Cristina Fernandez maneuver

I wish i shared Mcp's optimism and a I can't believe I just typed that.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:Here's a basic summary of stuff I've seen in the argument for:

"Again we bump into some problems of literalness, though, because some would argue that a person who has already run up against the limits of the 22nd Amendment isn’t “constitutionally ineligible” to be President (i.e., that person doesn’t fail to meet one or more of the requirements specified in Article II of the constitution, such as being at least 35 years old or a natural-born citizen of the United States) but is merely constitutionally ineligible to be elected President. Under this interpretation, a former two-term President would still be eligible, under the law, to obtain and hold the office of Vice President through election or appointment to that position.

It has a tinge of Medvedev and Putin switching roles every x number of years (although now Putin's given up on that).

wease wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:

Bammer wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:Just read an article in the New Yorker and I agree with it. Biden should pick Obama as his running mate. Trump = guaranteed done.

Michelle?

Barack

Barack can’t be Veep. The constitution clearly states he can’t be President again and they can’t put him in the position that might make that possible.

That’s not what the constitution says Wease.

doug rr wrote:

E.H. Ruddock wrote:Oh I know. I've just seen a lot of legal scholars argue that the way the language is, they feel there would be a case to making it work.

chris h2?

It works. Because if you think otherwise, Obama would be technically ineligible for Speaker of the House (it’s just 1 line removed from VP). Succession is not the same as elected.

this is a popularity contest

unleash the Oprah

McParadigm wrote:All this talk about finding an overshadowingly popular VP pick is just another manifestation of an electoral insecurity that is, frankly, embarrassing.

Donald Trump is 12 points underwater (with even worse favorability). His own polling shows him losing key swing states, and barely hanging on in other places that shouldn’t even be at risk.

The consistency and volume with which he would have to present a more inviting, less exhausting style of leadership between now and November in order to win is so far beyond him, not even his allies pretend to believe it. The Republican Party expects to lose the Senate.

If you’re the Democratic Party nominee, you don’t need more “popularity” at this point. You need more and more demonstrating that you’re not like the opposition. Clinging to figureheads or empowering celebrities is the worst choice you could make. Pick a capable political policy manager, because that’s what Joe Biden isn’t...and when you win the White House and Senate...you’re going to need a party-level leader who can do that.

This is a great point.

So George Clooney then?

E.H. Ruddock wrote:Here's a basic summary of stuff I've seen in the argument for:

"Again we bump into some problems of literalness, though, because some would argue that a person who has already run up against the limits of the 22nd Amendment isn’t “constitutionally ineligible” to be President (i.e., that person doesn’t fail to meet one or more of the requirements specified in Article II of the constitution, such as being at least 35 years old or a natural-born citizen of the United States) but is merely constitutionally ineligible to be elected President. Under this interpretation, a former two-term President would still be eligible, under the law, to obtain and hold the office of Vice President through election or appointment to that position.

I see you read the same Snopes article I did.

Chris_H_2 wrote:

wease wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:

Bammer wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:Just read an article in the New Yorker and I agree with it. Biden should pick Obama as his running mate. Trump = guaranteed done.

Michelle?

Barack

Barack can’t be Veep. The constitution clearly states he can’t be President again and they can’t put him in the position that might make that possible.

That’s not what the constitution says Wease.

Depends on the interpretation. I’m all for Barack getting back into things. I just don’t think it would work the way we want it to.

Oh, I don’t think he’d ever accept it. But Biden’s said he’s a transitional president. And if he truly just wants to make sure that Trump doesn’t get elected, maybe he’d have no problem playing second fiddle. It would be sweet though.