And President Pence nominates ...?

[HurricaneDitka]

@ElvisL1ves

A third of Republicans growing a conscience is just too far-fetched a dream to even discuss, apparently.

We could certainly discuss Republicans’ consciences, but this thread is based on an OP with this premise:

@sciurophobic

… Let’s say the Democrats somehow take enough seats in Congress …

and to answer the OP: I suspect it’d be some junior House member, lifted from obscurity.

[Inigo_Montoya]

@HurricaneDitka

It would require something like a bomb going off in a Senate Republican caucus meeting, or a massively-more-“successful” Scalise-style shooting spree at the next charity ballgame.

• Nods knowingly at HurricaneDirka and nonchalantly exits the thread *

[Shodan]

@HurricaneDitka

It would require something like a bomb going off in a Senate Republican caucus meeting, or a massively-more-“successful” Scalise-style shooting spree at the next charity ballgame. There just aren’t nearly enough Republican-held seats up for election otherwise.

I realize this is tongue-in-cheek, but I doubt there are enough Republican non-safe seats to flip the Senate even then.

Besides, no problem - just blame the bombing on the Dems/illegal immigrants/ISIS.

Regards,
Shodan

[ElvisL1ves]

Just like the Reichstag fire was blamed on the Communists?

[kaylasdad99]

I’d register as a Republican and let him nominate me.

[adaher]

I would think that Pence wouldn’t bother with a VP until he runs in 2020. There’s just no need for one. Paul Ryan would be next in line. If Democrats control Congress then Pence might go ahead and nominate a VP, and I would suspect it would be just a placeholder, probably a retired, respected old hand. Heck, if Dole’s still alive give him the honor, he’s spry.

[BobLibDem]

Paul Ryan. He’s going to leave the Congress anyway and has nothing else to do.

[JRDelirious]

@adaher

I would think that Pence wouldn’t bother with a VP until he runs in 2020.

The 25th Amendment says in case of a VP vacancy the Prez “shall” nominate a VP, so at some point he’d have to put forth a name if only to comply.

[adaher]

Didn’t Ford not have a VP until he ran for election in 1976?

[BobLibDem]

@adaher

Didn’t Ford not have a VP until he ran for election in 1976?

You’re forgetting Nelson Rockefeller?

[TriPolar]

@HurricaneDitka

This thread is only marginally more realistic than the last one. Do you realize that it takes 67 Senators to remove a President from office after he is impeached? The Democrats will have, at most, 49 votes by the end of the evening, and in the 2018 election, there are only 8 Republican-held seats up for election (I think). Best case scenario, if Democrats win every election between here and 2019, they’re still going to be ~10 votes short of removing the President from office, and that’s imagining a scenario where they win Senate races in Utah, Wyoming, Nebraska, Tennessee, and the like.

ETA: Yes, that’s how deep a hole the Democrats have fallen in and how high of a mountain it is to climb to get to impeachment.

Let’s just say the evidence comes out that Trump committed numerous crimes when he colluded with Putin and beforehand when he was money-laundering for Putin and he has been pushing for elimination of sanctions at Putin’s direction because he was compromised. Well, I guess you’re right, there’s no way the Republicans would vote to remove him from office no matter how many crimes he committed that were proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.

[The_Tooth]

Not when there are taxes to cut and parks to ruin and Muslims to persecute, no.

[HurricaneDitka]

@TriPolar

Let’s just say the evidence comes out that Trump committed numerous crimes when he colluded with Putin and beforehand when he was money-laundering for Putin and he has been pushing for elimination of sanctions at Putin’s direction because he was compromised. Well, I guess you’re right, there’s no way the Republicans would vote to remove him from office no matter how many crimes he committed that were proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Please see post #5

[TriPolar]

@HurricaneDitka

Please see post #5

Ok. I’ve seen it. It doesn’t make any difference.

[adaher]

@BobLibDem

You’re forgetting Nelson Rockefeller?

Wasn’t he nominated in 1976?

Okay, quick google shows I got my memories confused. Ford nominated Rockefeller to be VP in late 1974 and then Ford named Dole his VP nominee in the 1976 election.

[BobLibDem]

@adaher

Wasn’t he nominated in 1976?

Okay, quick google shows I got my memories confused. Ford nominated Rockefeller to be VP in late 1974 and then Ford named Dole his VP nominee in the 1976 election.

How do you forget a guy who died in action, so to speak?

[Horatius]

@Lord_Feldon

Pence wouldn’t have any real agency in this far-fetched scenario. It would be like Nixon “nominating” Gerald Ford in 1973. He wasn’t actually given much of a choice. The alternative was having no VP.

Probably some boring congressional Republican who isn’t going to be perceived as a threat to win later on. Like a Kevin McCarthy or some other factotum. (This could backfire on the Democrats. Gerald Ford was pretty boring and he almost won in 1976.)

Doesn’t the VP nominee need to be confirmed by the very Congress that hypothetically just turfed Trump?

So, yeah, I agree that Pence wouldn’t have much leeway to nominate his dream VP, he’d have to compromise on some who would be acceptable to this Congress that had, apparently, finally had enough of extremist GOP nonsense.

And honestly, if that meant we got a “boring” GOP VP who might stand a chance at winning the next Presidential election, I’d consider that a win. We really do need to bring the GOP back to some sense of normalcy. Having one party so completely dominated by whackjobs does a disservice to democracy.

[Buck_Godot]

I don’t know who Pence would nominate, but given that the vice presidency is pretty much a do-nothing job, I doubt that the Dems would put up much of a fight as long as the nominee wasn’t 1) whackadoodle conservative , 2) woefully unqualified, 3) scandal ridden, 4) Heavily involved in the Trump administration.

[dalej42]

@adaher

Wasn’t he nominated in 1976?

Okay, quick google shows I got my memories confused. Ford nominated Rockefeller to be VP in late 1974 and then Ford named Dole his VP nominee in the 1976 election.

No, Bob Dole was the VP candidate for Ford in 1976. Rockefeller was Ford’s caretaker VP but wasn’t acceptable to the Reagan wing of the Republicans.

[escaped]

@HurricaneDitka

I would not have guessed that. Lots of evangelicals feel that Mormons are a satanic cult, or at least deserving a similar level of contempt.

I KNOW EVANGELICAL THAT VOTED FOR Romney BECAUSE THEY Thought Obama was a muslem.(He is not.)