| Author |
Message |
    
zoe
Citizen
Username: Zoe
Post Number: 285
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 11:14 am: |     |
What looked like a sure thing three months ago is starting to look a bit shaky. I’m talking about Bush’s reelection next year. I’m no expert at counting votes, but my gut tells me that Bush and the Republicans are in trouble next year. He’s generally lost my support through is big spending policies. The government is simply growing much too fast under George Bush to suit my libertarian tastes. And we’re not just talking defense growth here either.
My prediction,... if this slippage continues look for Hitlary in the 2004 race. This is going to be fun.
Just who will she choose to run at her side? Why Al Gore, of course. It'll be Hillary and Gore in 2004!
|
Mr. Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 304
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 11:50 am: | |
Do you think that a presidential candidate would give in to being a vice president again? That doesn't seem likely to me.
Tom Reingold
|
johnny
Citizen
Username: Johnny
Post Number: 691
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 11:57 am: | |
Don't even joke. Hillary as President would be an unprecedented disaster.
Please elect anybody but Hillary in '04 and '08. |
jet
Citizen
Username: Jet
Post Number: 225
Registered: 7-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 12:43 pm: | |
I agree that W is not as bullet proof as he once appeared. Whats to stop Hillary from running with her husband ? |
notehead
Citizen
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 630
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 1:21 pm: | |
No way will Hillary run. I think there's too much anti-Clinton stigma in the country for her to be seriously thinking about it for a long time. |
doublea
Citizen
Username: Doublea
Post Number: 237
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 1:28 pm: | |
Scary. "Hitlary" and Goring. Check the spelling in Zoe's post. |
jet
Citizen
Username: Jet
Post Number: 226
Registered: 7-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 1:49 pm: | |
She will not pass on running in 04' if it looks like there is a possiablity of winning , she will not pull a Mario. She is done with being Senator of NY . She'd rather sign books . Besideds Rudy wants her job. A lot can happen between now & 11/04 but she may be as close as it's going to get right now. |
Pierce Butler
Citizen
Username: Pierce_butler
Post Number: 25
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 2:37 pm: | |
jet, in answer to your question, the Twelfth and Twenty-Second Amendments prevent Bill Clinton from being elected Vice-President:
The Twenty-Second Amendment provides: "No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice . . . .";
The Twelfth Amendment provides: "[N]o person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States." |
jet
Citizen
Username: Jet
Post Number: 228
Registered: 7-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 2:53 pm: | |
Thank you, Pierce |
amandacat
Citizen
Username: Amandacat
Post Number: 182
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 4:37 pm: | |
But isn't Clinton only consititutionally ineligible to be elected to the office of President? |
woodstock
Citizen
Username: Woodstock
Post Number: 269
Registered: 9-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 12:15 pm: | |
Mr. Butler,
Continuing Amandacat's point, does that mean that a former president could not hold any Cabinet or Congressional seat? Isn't every Congressman and Cabinet member theoretically in line for the presidency?
Waiting For The Electrician, Or Someone Like Him |
#9Dream
Citizen
Username: 9dream
Post Number: 519
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 1:01 pm: | |
I have it figured out! Hillary runs in '04 and puts Bill on the ticket as her VP. She wins, and the day after her inauguration she resigns. Bill becomes President.
FOUR MORE YEARS! FOUR MORE YEARS!
LOL.... |
newjerz
Citizen
Username: Newjerz
Post Number: 49
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 1:09 pm: | |
Anyone who doesn't like Hillary should vote for the Democrat in 2004 so that the Democrats get back in office and freeze her out of a potential bid in 2008. |
Pierce Butler
Citizen
Username: Pierce_butler
Post Number: 26
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 2:31 pm: | |
Interesting question. Perhaps "constitutionally ineligible to the office of President" means only that he is less than 35 years old, not a natural born citizen of the U.S., or has been a resident of the U.S. for fewer than 14 years (the only qualifications in existence at the time the 12th Amendment was ratified). That is one possible reading. In that case, we could end up with a sham election where a former two-term President runs as Vice-President, wins, and the elected President immediately resigns to give the former President a third term. That is probably not what the framers and ratifiers of the 22nd Amendment had in mind, but the language might permit it.
Relatedly, nothing prevents Clinton from running for a third term -- he just cannot be "elected." That would put the onus on the voters, in the first instance, not to vote for his electors; failing that, the burden would be on the electors themselves not to vote for him; and, if all else fails, Congress would have to refuse to certify the result. And since it is probably a non-justiciable political question, the courts ought not get involved (then again, the same was true of Bush v. Gore). All this would make the 2000 election look like a tea party.
(I tried to post this earlier, before #9 came up with the same scenario, but had access problems). |
Pierce Butler
Citizen
Username: Pierce_butler
Post Number: 27
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 2:46 pm: | |
woodstock, the line of succession after the Vice-President is governed by statute, not the Constitution (article II, sec. 1 of the Constitution expressly delegates to Congress this responsibility). It goes: Speaker of the House, President Pro Tempore of the Senate, and then the Cabinet positions in the order in which they were created, I believe. So only one Congressperson and one Senator are in the line of succession. I don't know if, by statute, a former President is barred from serving in the cabinet -- I would imagine not. I also would not think that a former President is barred from serving as Speaker of the House or President Pro Tempore of the Senate. If these assumptions are true, a former two-term President could technically succeed to the Presidency for a third term from any position other than the Vice-Presidency (and even then it is at last arguable that he could), since, as amandacat points out, the 22nd Amendment bars him only from being "elected" President again. |
mem
Citizen
Username: Mem
Post Number: 1817
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 2:52 pm: | |
Question: Do you have to be a natural born citizen to run for president? |
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 1874
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 3:04 pm: | |
Ja. Ahnold kann nicht Präsident sein. |
mem
Citizen
Username: Mem
Post Number: 1818
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 3:25 pm: | |
Nohero,
Ugh. English puleeeeese.
 |
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 1875
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 3:31 pm: | |
Yes, Ahnold cannot be the Pwesident. |
John Davenport
Citizen
Username: Jjd
Post Number: 80
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 5:03 pm: | |
I don't want Arnold for President, but I think we need to amend the constitution to get rid of the clause banning foreign-born citizens from being President. Granted, it did save us from Kissinger running, but still, it is no longer justified.
Now for Hilary, a good pick would be Colin Powell. I know, he'll never run for President, but maybe he'd go for VP. Why not? We used to have President and VP from different parties in the past, and I think Powell is too decent at heart to be a Republican anyway.
You must admit, that ticket would be unbeatable!
John Davenport |
Redsox
Citizen
Username: Redsox
Post Number: 295
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 7:21 pm: | |
vilification of republicans by the over educated left fringe of the democratic party does more to advance the republican party cause than it does to harm.
|
Flt
Citizen
Username: Flt
Post Number: 68
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 7:44 pm: | |
vilification of democrats by under-educated right fringe of the republican party does more to advance the democratic party (redundant phrase removed) |
woodstock
Citizen
Username: Woodstock
Post Number: 270
Registered: 9-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 10:24 pm: | |
Can someone please explain the phrase "over-educated" to me? How can you have too much education? If you mean too little real-world experience, say so. Otherwise you're telling our children that learning too much can be a bad thing. Now there's a great message to send...
Or does overeducated mean "Anyone who went thru more years of schoolin' than me"?
Waiting For The Electrician, Or Someone Like Him |
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 1881
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 11:08 pm: | |
Redsox - The discussion was started by someone who used the term "Hitlary". In addition to being knee-slappingly hilarious, many people might consider that to fit the definition of "vilification". |
Pierce Butler
Citizen
Username: Pierce_butler
Post Number: 29
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 1, 2003 - 10:48 am: | |
An historical note apropos to JD's post: I believe that the requirement that the President be a natural-born citizen was placed in the Constitution largely in order to prevent Alexander Hamilton, who was born in the West Indies, from ever becoming President. Though Hamilton was brilliant, he was also extraordinarily arrogant and was hated by many in his day (especially, of course, Aaron Burr). If this was the primary motivation behind the provision, perhaps it has outlived its purpose, as Hamilton has been dead for nearly 200 years. Then again, the same can be said for the 14-year residency requirement, which I believe was placed in the Constitution to prevent (in the short term) anyone, especially English loyalists, from becoming President who had fled the colonies prior to the Revolution. |
Redsox
Citizen
Username: Redsox
Post Number: 296
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, August 1, 2003 - 3:48 pm: | |
flt
this isn't an english course.
btw - am a hard core democrat
my point is that refering to republicans as "not decent, evil, etc." and saying that you hate them is not really constructive.
and woodstock,
your disdain of the working man is quite evident... and throwing kids into the mix ...come on, really man... |
zoe
Citizen
Username: Zoe
Post Number: 295
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 6, 2003 - 12:04 pm: | |
I absolutely believe that Hillary will run in 2004.
Her cagey language on the question, the slide in Bush’s popularity ratings, the abysmal performance of the current collection of Democrat candidates and the concern that the Democratic Party nominating process may lead to the nomination of an unelectable candidate, and you have Hillary riding to the rescue!
Hillary is trying to position herself toward the center right now. Check out her vote for the war resolution. Make no mistake, this dangerous woman is an extreme left wing ideologue. (Probably loved by MOL'ers)
Yale professors who labeled her a socialist knew their stuff. She is anti-individual and anti-capitalist. She, like her husband, believes that America is great because of its government. To Hitlary anything worth doing is worth being done by government. Take all of this and add one more personality trait. Hitlary is vicious.
Virtually every person who has had the misfortune of working closely with this lady, from police officers to household servants to Secret Service agents to aides, agree that she is as mean as they come. Hitlary makes Leona Helmsley look like Julie Andrews.
If Hillary runs she will have 95% of the captive black vote, almost 100% of the looney left, and more than 60% of the women. She will say the things these voters want to hear. Honesty means nothing to her; it never has, and there’s no need to change now. She will carefully control every encounter with the press, surround herself with friendly campaign crowds and hide her snake side from the camera. In short, she could win.
|
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 1096
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 6, 2003 - 12:51 pm: | |
in reading your last paragraph, other than the specific demographics, I wonder how that strategy would differ greatly from any other successful political campaign? |
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 1912
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 6, 2003 - 1:07 pm: | |
Tom - I was thinking the same thing. A politician who will "say the things the voters want to hear"? One who will "carefully control every encounter with the press", surrounded by "friendly campaign crowds", while hiding any "snake side from the camera"? Good lord, can this be stopped?!! |
zoe
Citizen
Username: Zoe
Post Number: 298
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 6, 2003 - 1:24 pm: | |
Tom wonders "how that strategy would differ greatly from any other successful political campaign?" and Nohero agrees, "thinking the same thing."
Do you know why? Cause you both are used to that style of politics. You identify with it. It is all you understand because it is the style of your party, the Democratic Party. |
zoe
Citizen
Username: Zoe
Post Number: 300
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 6, 2003 - 1:29 pm: | |
Tom wonders "how that strategy would differ greatly from any other successful political campaign?" and Nohero agrees, "thinking the same thing."
Do you know why? Cause you both are used to that style of politics. You identify with it. It is all you understand because it is the style of your party, the Democratic Party. |
Dave Ross
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 4974
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 6, 2003 - 1:37 pm: | |
Republicans target their marketing efforts too. Big whoop. What most people really want to hear about are ISSUES.
And there are none here. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 1097
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 6, 2003 - 1:41 pm: | |
I take it then that the Republicans
- say things that voters don't want to hear;
- don't try to manage their press coverage;
- surround themselves with unfriendly crowds;
- trumpet the worst of their personalities
Interesting tactic, but hey, whatever works for you. |
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 1914
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 6, 2003 - 1:44 pm: | |
"Tom - I was thinking the same thing." |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 1098
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 6, 2003 - 1:47 pm: | |
I think that, for zoe, if a Democrat has sliced bananas on his cereal in the morning that is an indication of a very serious character flaw.
Tell me if you were thinking the same thing  |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page