Jump to content

US Politics: Putin up with Trump


Ormond
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

James K. Polk decided to not run a second term, and Zachary Taylor who was the next President was not Polk's VP.

James Buchanan served one term, and the next President--Lincoln--was not his VP.

I don't think these two are good examples for the case you're trying to make, since in both a one-term president was succeeded by a member of the other party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Old Zog said:

I don't think these two are good examples for the case you're trying to make, since in both a one-term president was succeeded by a member of the other party.

Fair enough, I was searching quickly and those are errors on my part. Here's the full list:

James K. Polk--1 term, followed by opposite party

James Buchanan--1 term, followed by opposite party

Rutherford B. Hayes--1 term, followed by same party President who was not Hayes' VP.

Calvin Coolidge--1 term, followed by same party Pres who was not Coolidge's VP.

Harry Truman is kind of a maybe he did/maybe he didn't. He took over early in Roosevelt's presidency, ran once on his own, then not again. If you count him, he goes with the first two on my list, not the second two.

Lyndon Johnson was followed by Nixon, but he is in the Truman boat as well. 

That's the whole list. If you look at situations exactly like the one we're speculating on, then it has been 50/50.

If you add in Johnson and Truman, the numbers are worse, but with a sample size of 6, I'd say this is not fantasy land as Mormont argued.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

I disagree. If Biden "chooses" to not run again, then VP is out the window. A VP has no hold on the nomination at that point--it goes back to a primary.

If Biden doesn't run there will almost certainly be a competitive primary, yes.  However, as long as Biden presumably endorses her, Harris will start out with huge institutional and financial advantages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Vice President becoming President is pretty rare anyway, if you discount VPs who took office because the President couldn't finish his term due to death/assassination or resignation.  Other than John Adams and Thomas Jefferson who were elected VP under a different system, only Martin Van Buren and George Bush gained the Presidency in the next election after being Vice President. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These historical comparisons don't really provide any insight, particularly when talking about primaries.  Primaries weren't nationalized until the 1970s, and there weren't any primaries at all until the progressive era at the beginning of the 20th century.  The most recent analogue to Biden not running would be the 1968 Democratic primaries, where VP Hubert Humphrey didn't even compete in primary states and instead focused on collecting delegates in non-primary states. 

This strategy paid off - even at the time of RFK's death, when he looked emergent, Humphrey led RFK in delegates 561 to 393.  During the primary era, the only sitting VPs to run for president were George Bush and Al Gore, and aside from Bush's third place finish in Iowa, both easily cruised to their nominations.  Even former VPs are pretty successful at the primary level - both Mondale and Biden won the nomination, albeit each contest was quite competitive (particularly Mondale's).  The only VP to run and not win during the primary era, IIRC, is Dan Quayle in 2000.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just popping back here rather than making a separate thread to note that, holy shit:

This might actually be happening! Just need the House to move and no more clock shifting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fez said:

Just popping back here rather than making a separate thread to note that, holy shit:

This might actually be happening! Just need the House to move and no more clock shifting.

At least we found something Sinema and Manchin didn't obstruct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Corvinus85 said:

At least we found something Sinema and Manchin didn't obstruct.

Well in Sinema's case Arizona is one of the two states that doesn't observe daylight savings anyway.  As for Manchin, I guess the coal industry approved of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DMC said:

Well in Sinema's case Arizona is one of the two states that doesn't observe daylight savings anyway.  As for Manchin, I guess the coal industry approved of it.

 

Would have been funny if Sinema was against it trying to protect the privilege of it like NH and Iowa with the primaries.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Larry of the Lake said:

 

Would have been funny if Sinema was against it trying to protect the privilege of it like NH and Iowa with the primaries.  

Given that AZ doesn’t recognize DST does that mean AZ would permanently be an hour behind its neighbors?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Given that AZ doesn’t recognize DST does that mean AZ would permanently be an hour behind its neighbors?

I have no idea bwcause I refuse to understand which one is DST and I don't care.  I'm going to be mad no matter what happens and there's nothing you can do to stop me.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DMC said:

These historical comparisons don't really provide any insight, particularly when talking about primaries.  Primaries weren't nationalized until the 1970s, and there weren't any primaries at all until the progressive era at the beginning of the 20th century.  The most recent analogue to Biden not running would be the 1968 Democratic primaries, where VP Hubert Humphrey didn't even compete in primary states and instead focused on collecting delegates in non-primary states. 

This strategy paid off - even at the time of RFK's death, when he looked emergent, Humphrey led RFK in delegates 561 to 393.  During the primary era, the only sitting VPs to run for president were George Bush and Al Gore, and aside from Bush's third place finish in Iowa, both easily cruised to their nominations.  Even former VPs are pretty successful at the primary level - both Mondale and Biden won the nomination, albeit each contest was quite competitive (particularly Mondale's).  The only VP to run and not win during the primary era, IIRC, is Dan Quayle in 2000.

They provide insight insofar as the scenario has happened, and it isn't fantasy. I also can't see Kamala having a huge benefit at this point as she hasn't been impressive to lots of people (fair or not), she's a woman of color, Trump will probably run again meaning the Dems will feel the need to push some other inoffensive lump of white maleness, etc. I really don't see Harris having much momentum based on the last year--her own campaign stalled out early in the primaries despite her name being pushed and her being on lots of people's radar in 2019. In terms of campaigning and getting people excited, she's just not proved she's capable of that.

I happen to like her well enough, but if Biden steps down, I just don't see her going very far in the primary. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Given that AZ doesn’t recognize DST does that mean AZ would permanently be an hour behind its neighbors?

Depends on the neighbor. If this gets finalized, it means Arizona will permanently be in the same time zone as California (and Nevada), which is probably more important than being in the same time zone as New Mexico, Utah, and Colorado.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Centrist Simon Steele said:

I also can't see Kamala having a huge benefit at this point as she hasn't been impressive to lots of people (fair or not)

If she's the sitting VP endorsed by the sitting president, yes, she will have a huge advantage in the primary.  Even in Biden's current slump, he still has about 75% approval among Democrats.  As does Harris.

10 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Given that AZ doesn’t recognize DST does that mean AZ would permanently be an hour behind its neighbors?

I was thinking about that and that it what seems to me if they observe standard time, right?  Either way, Sinema was actually the presiding officer during the unanimous consent -- and she is pumped!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Screw all time zones! One 24 hour day for the whole world!

(The amount of sunlight doesn’t actually change in each place don’t you know?)

Edit: 12 pm doesn’t have to be my noon. I don’t care if the clock says 2 am when the sun is at its highest point in the sky. 
 

Edit 2: At the very least, flying wouldn’t force me to do simple math. 

Edited by A True Kaniggit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Literally modeled after the TX laws, this goes even further:

Quote

 

.... The proposed abortion ban does not have an exception for rape or incest, but those who impregnated a patient "through an act of rape, sexual assault, or incest” would not be allowed to sue an abortion provider. However, a rapist's relatives could each bring a civil action.

“I think you may not understand what your bill does ... this allows people who have no knowledge, no standing, that have not been harmed to bring a lawsuit against any doctor that they believe has performed an abortion,” said Democratic Rep. Bob Freeman. ....

 

https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2022-03-15/tennessee-lawmakers-introduce-texas-styled-abortion-bill

Tell us They aren't making war on women.  Tell us They don't mean it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that there should be a draft. Each person can register for their beliefs. The people who don’t want abortion can sign up. They may be required to adopt a child and they may be required to pay full maternal care costs for others. There is a ten( I just picked a number but it may be inspired) limit if children that each must adopt. If the mother dies because of their decisions, they may be sued for reckless endangerment. They will be required to contribute to a fund for the education of the children, and another for the mothers.

Edited by HoodedCrow
Clarity
Link to comment
Share on other sites

State-after-state:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/03/idahos-anti-abortion-law-takes-a-page-from-texas-playbook.html

"Idaho’s New Anti-Abortion Law Offers Cash Bounties to Rapists’ Family Members
Borrowing from Texas’ playbook, state lawmakers have crafted an even crueler anti-abortion measure in anticipation of Roe’s demise."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...