US Politics: The supply chain of hot takes remains robust

[SFDanny]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Interesting.  From a normative perspective, I would rather Biden not run again at all if his intention was to run again then retire mid second term.

From Biden's perspective, I think he looks to Harris as his chosen successor. A mid term retirement makes him directly responsible for Harris becoming the first woman President, and the second African American to hold the office. If he retires after the second anniversary of his inauguration, he also gives Harris a unique shot at becoming a 10 year President.  Of course, the same would be true if he retires after completing two years of his current term. All of which I think Biden would see as part of  a legacy of his Presidency. Wild speculation on my part.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

From Biden's perspective, I think he looks to Harris as his chosen successor.

I get that, but again my normative problem is it's misleading the voters.  Especially, as you say, as an apparent attempt to maximize the amount of time Harris could serve as president.  That's getting way too cute with democratic ideals for my taste.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

I don't think Biden will do it for exactly those reasons. He has won a mandate for four years, not one for two and two for Harris. He will be there for the full term unless his health starts declining significantly. 

Any update on the BBB has Manchin stopped being a total knobhead.

[SFDanny]

22 minutes ago, DMC said:

I get that, but again my normative problem is it's misleading the voters.  Especially, as you say, as an apparent attempt to maximize the amount of time Harris could serve as president.  That's getting way too cute with democratic ideals for my taste.

How is it misleading voters? Harris has to stand for election as Vice President, and everyone knows what the role of a Vice-President is in the case of a President resigning his office. If Biden runs in 2024 for reelection and doesn't discuss the possibility of Harris replacing him, then you might have an argument, but I doubt that will be the case given his age.

As to the "too cute" charge around the timing of a possible Biden resignation, and all of this is just my speculation, the Constitution isn't a secret document and the effect of a retirement after the second anniversary of a inauguration is well known. LBJ had the same opportunity. He could have run in 1968, but chose not to do so. Perhaps my being old enough to remember his speech saying he wouldn't run again effects my view of things, but following the Constitution doesn't seem "too cute."

Anyway, file my crazy predictions away for posterity. I'll buy you a drink if Harris is a ninth year President.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

2 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

How is it misleading voters? Harris has to stand for election as Vice President, and everyone knows what the role of a Vice-President is in the case of a President resigning his office. If Biden runs in 2024 for reelection and doesn't discuss the possibility of Harris replacing him, then you might have an argument, but I doubt that will be the case given his age.

He ran for a full term, and not for two years with him stepping down in favour of Harris. Harris would have no democratic mandate. If Biden's health fails, that's another issue. But to voluntarily step down, just because. That's extremely problematic.

[SFDanny]

31 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Any update on the BBB has Manchin stopped being a total knobhead.

link?

I did see this on filibuster reform. Looks promising

[DMC]

11 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

If Biden runs in 2024 for reelection and doesn't discuss the possibility of Harris replacing him, then you might have an argument, but I doubt that will be the case given his age.

If Biden runs for reelection, then he is making a commitment to the voters to serve out that term.  Now, I suppose he could run and tell the public he intends to retire after two years, but that totally would not fly and he wouldn't be reelected.

15 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

LBJ had the same opportunity. He could have run in 1968, but chose not to do so.

The LBJ comparison is irrelevant.  He obviously did not intend to take over the presidency based on the timing of JFK's assassination (although I suppose there are still people who think he did).

[Varysblackfyre321]

9 hours ago, Week said:

No

You know one could easily go if OJ had been white the police would have killed him when he got into a high speed chase with them after murdering his white ex-wife. After all police had murdered Tony Timpa a white man who called the police to help with a schizophrenic episode and who kept pleading for mercy as they put a knee to his back and snuffed the life out of him. 

That statement could be rebuffed with the inclusion of some notable cases to where black people were unjustifiably murdered by law-enforcement.

Same thing works in the works quite frankly.

[Week]

2 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

You 

Me?

3 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

 frankly.

Stevely.

[Week]

7 hours ago, DMC said:

I get that, but again my normative problem is it's misleading the voters.  Especially, as you say, as an apparent attempt to maximize the amount of time Harris could serve as president.  That's getting way too cute with democratic ideals for my taste.

Very much agree with this. Feels dishonest and would not put Harris - or Dems broadly - in a position to succeed.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

10 hours ago, TheLastWolf said:

I'm hearing rumors that Harris is going to be replaced by some Transportation secretary or whatever as VP due to concerns about her handling the Mexican border immigrants issue. Coming in the wake of Biden claiming to run for reelection in '24 and some Democrats wanting Harris as candidate.

Confused unga bunga

I don't know if the VP can be replaced until the next election. Biden could choose a different running mate at that time. This is definitely a weird story though.

[Altherion]

8 hours ago, SFDanny said:

link?

I did see this on filibuster reform. Looks promising

That article is from early March. He has since clarified that he does not want mess with the filibuster.

[IheartIheartTesla]

21 minutes ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

I don't know if the VP can be replaced until the next election. Biden could choose a different running mate at that time. This is definitely a weird story though.

I believe they can, if they voluntarily resign the position. It has happen fictionally on the West Wing, and in real life with Spiro T. Agnew (also with Calhoun earlier, googling informs me).

[DMC]

The vice president cannot be fired, they are elected by the voters.  They can, of course, resign, be asked to resign, or be impeached.

[Fez]

Just now, IheartIheartTesla said:

I believe they can, if they voluntarily resign the position. It has happen fictionally on the West Wing, and in real life with Spiro T. Agnew (also with Calhoun earlier, googling informs me).

Prior to the 25th amendment, when the Vice President resigned the office was vacant until the next election; which is what happened when Calhoun resigned and happened several other times as well in history due to death, resignation, or the Vice President becoming President. Theoretically they could also be impeached, though that's never happened before.

Under section II of the 25th amendment, if the office of vice president is vacant for any reason, the President may nominate a new vice president; subject to majority vote confirmation by BOTH chambers of Congress.

[Zorral]

17 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

That's not exactly accurate. I'd suggest checking out Joanne Freeman's The Field of Blood if you haven't already done so. It documents violence in Congress in the few decades leading up to the Civil War, and while the majority of it was started by Southerners, it wasn't always them who were in the wrong (at least when it came to starting confrontations, though they mostly were started over the terrible Southern culture at the time).

You are right.  Yes, I have read Field of Blood.  Ay-up -- escalation. Not to mention what happened outside the Capitol after the Fugitive Slave Act, when communities came together to break out of prison cells incarcerated African Americans held to be transported South, attacks on posses taking African Americans down south, even an armed shootout on a farm in PA when a Maryland slaveholder came to take back his property -- he and his sons were killed by the mixed white and black defenders.  Called the Christiana Riot - 1851.

And, never let us forget John Brown.

But for every one of these, how many violent attacks upon the property and persons of abolitionist views, as with Garrison and his press.   In the end, the violence quotient is squarely with Them. Nor did it end with Appomattox.  Instead it escalated and continued to escalate, and ever more so in the Civil Rights - Jim Crow protest era.

 

[Centrist Simon Steele]

1 hour ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

I believe they can, if they voluntarily resign the position. It has happen fictionally on the West Wing, and in real life with Spiro T. Agnew (also with Calhoun earlier, googling informs me).

 

1 hour ago, DMC said:

The vice president cannot be fired, they are elected by the voters.  They can, of course, resign, be asked to resign, or be impeached.

Yeha, sorry, this is what I meant IheartlheartTesla--that Kamala couldn't be fired (so to speak).

[Durckad]

Yeah, I really don't like this idea of Biden running for a 2nd term, winning, then resigning at some point so Kamala can take over. That just seems incredibly sleazy.

If he does so as a result of circumstances outside his control? Fine. But to deliberately do so? That's some true Republican-level shit.

[JGP]

Quality member of the judiciary here, jesus christ

 

[TrackerNeil]

13 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

He ran for a full term, and not for two years with him stepping down in favour of Harris. Harris would have no democratic mandate. 

George W. Bush won his office on a wing and a prayer, yet he governed with all the powers of the president. Trump lost the popular vote, was impeached twice, and he did the same. Kamala Harris would have no less a mandate than they had.