For a long time in the 1970s, that Ronald Reagan would be president in the future was a regular laugh line.
For a long time after the 80’s, that Ronald Reagan was a president in the past was a regular laugh line.
I’m sure this has been mentioned before, but this is a long thread: there is a possibility that either candidate for President could randomly die before the election (of old age or COVID or anything in between, although I’m not convinced Biden has dementia). I’m sure this possibility is factoring into the decision, but I really do wonder how it’d play out if it came to be (although not particularly eager to find out). There are so many “but… on the other hand…” factors in play here that I’m honestly not sure.
I’ve been wondering what the law says if a presidential candidate dies after being nominated and before the election.
Or for that matter, after the election and before being sworn in as president. Although I expect the constitution mentions that case.
You and Leaper should search for this because there have been a thousand threads covering all possible permutations and possibilities.
The very short answers:
If the candidate dies before the election, the party is responsible for selecting a replacement. If it is too late to change ballots, then they’re stuck. If the winner dies before the Electoral College votes, then state law decides whether they have to vote for the winner or if they can vote for the vice president or someone else. If the winner dies after the EC meets, then the Vice President elect becomes President on Jan. 20.
I wasn’t asking that question at all, actually…
Isn’t that exactly one of the possibilities I covered? If not, what question were you asking?
I figured this was the issue; I meant “play out” in terms of the election results, whether the VP would get as many votes as Biden would have if it happens before votes were cast, etc. IOW, how good a thing Biden dying would be for Trump, how much this is factoring into the Biden campaign’s thinking for VP choice, what any answer would say either way about the nature of this year’s presidential race (could “any Democrat” beat Trump?”), etc.
As long as Biden picks whomever appeals to “Susie Sorority of the Silent Majority”.
I was, though.
Thanks!
And don’t forget there is a current SCOTUS case that may decide electors can vote for anyone qualified as long as at least one is not from that state so those state laws may end up moot.
The fact that Biden has said he’ll release a list of black women as potential SC nominees makes me think his veep pick won’t be a black woman. Seems like he could’ve just said he would release a list of potential SC nominees, but the fact that he specifically made it a list of black women tells me he knows his eventual running mate may piss off some people in the AA community.
So…my money’s still on Warren, but it could also be Duckworth or Lujan Grisham.
I think that’s a problem for women who aren’t afraid to exude power. It’s like the “uppity negro” thing. It speaks more to the ability of other powerful women to appear subordinate enough that chauvinist men can stomach them.
Clinton and Harris aren’t afraid to show who’s boss and many men can’t handle that.
I can completely agree that there is that problem for women who exude power and completely disagree that such is the problem for Clinton and Harris. Neither came off to me as exuding power or showing anyone who’s boss. To me their lack of connection was the sense that they were not really saying what they believed but what they thought would sell better at that particular minute. For Clinton I think it was the result of having had every phrase she has ever said taken out of context and twisted so often. Harris though - I don’t believe she believed most of what she said. I think Clinton actually was sincere but Harris couldn’t fake it well. The before being packaged and repackaged for the primaries Harris - she exuded power and sincerity. I had expected that Harris to be a real contender. That Harris though was not on the debate stage.
Susan Rice is doing an awful lot of interviews across all media lately. It seems to me that she’s already behaving as if the job is hers to lose. I hope it’s hers to keep.
Washington Post reporting that Tammy Duckworth is getting a close look by the Biden campaign. I still think it’ll be Harris, though.
Duckworth is my first choice. A war hero, lost both legs in combat, she’ll run (even with no legs!) rings around General Bone Spurs in campaigning. Being a woman and a minority on top of that will make Chump’s head explode.
Duckworth said it’s OK to talk about taking down Washington statues . That pretty much takes her off the list.
Yeah, that was a seriously stupid thing for Duckworth to say and it should disqualify her. It’s been a while since I had to make a nasty phone call to my Senator’s office, but she’s getting one today.
The last thing Biden wants is 3 debates with statues being the main issue, Biden remembers 1988 very well when the pledge of allegiance and flag burning became issues.
You know how you show political ambition? By running for President. Or Vice President, or heck, governor or senator or representative. Of course all of these women are ambitious, and so are all of the men they’re running against. So?
And of course it’s OK to talk about taking down statues of Washington. When someone asks you whether it’s OK, you’re already talking about it. When you say “We shouldn’t take down statues of Washington”, you’re talking about taking down statues of Washington.