Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 3598 3599 [3600] 3601

Author Topic: AmeriPol thread  (Read 4425163 times)

Sirus

  • Bay Watcher
  • Resident trucker/goddess/ex-president.
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53985 on: November 08, 2024, 12:51:16 pm »

There's talk about the vice president, Vance, stepping up as president should the fat old man die.
This, at least, is basically how things are supposed to work - the VP steps in if the President dies. It's happened several times in US history, usually after the sitting President gets assassinated, but I can remember at least one dying of natural causes. On the face of the talk, there's nothing nefarious about it; Trump is old, not in the best health, and has had at least two people try to kill him in recent months. Him dying in office is a very real possibility.

Now, whether a President Vance would be more or less of a disaster than President Trump, that's beyond my knowledge.
Logged
Quote from: Max White
And lo! Sirus did drive his mighty party truck unto Vegas, and it was good.

Star Wars: Age of Rebellion OOC Thread

Shadow of the Demon Lord - OOC Thread - IC Thread

hector13

  • Bay Watcher
  • It’s shite being Scottish
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53986 on: November 08, 2024, 12:56:44 pm »

One silver lining to that is no matter when Vance takes over, if Trump dies during his term it counts as a full term for Vance, so he’d only be eligible for one more afterwards.
Logged
Look, we need to raise a psychopath who will murder God, we have no time to be spending on cooking.

the way your fingertips plant meaningless soliloquies makes me think you are the true evil among us.

JoshuaFH

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53987 on: November 08, 2024, 01:16:12 pm »

One silver lining to that is no matter when Vance takes over, if Trump dies during his term it counts as a full term for Vance, so he’d only be eligible for one more afterwards.

Wasn't it the other way around? That the rules is someone can only be 'elected president' twice, but he wasn't 'elected president', but 'elected vice-president' and therefore can still be elected president twice more? I might be misremembering.
Logged

hector13

  • Bay Watcher
  • It’s shite being Scottish
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53988 on: November 08, 2024, 01:23:37 pm »

I mean I’m remembering off a tidbit I can’t even remember the source of. I think it had something to do with Ford?

Perhaps I shall look it up.

Edit: 22nd Amendment. Anybody who has served two years of a term as president, having replaced somebody else who was elected as president, can only run once more.

Edit 2: Having thought about it a teeny bit, there does seem to be a massive loophole in that. Someone can only be elected president twice (or once) but if someone were to be elected president, step down in favour of their VP, and then they stand down in favour of a different VP, the third person would still be able to be elected president twice because the first VP wasn’t elected president in the first place.

Edit 3: 25th Amendment protects from that to some extent; requires both houses of Congress to approve an appointee to a VP vacancy.
« Last Edit: November 08, 2024, 01:45:12 pm by hector13 »
Logged
Look, we need to raise a psychopath who will murder God, we have no time to be spending on cooking.

the way your fingertips plant meaningless soliloquies makes me think you are the true evil among us.

Starver

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53989 on: November 08, 2024, 02:03:27 pm »

One silver lining to that is no matter when Vance takes over, if Trump dies during his term it counts as a full term for Vance, so he’d only be eligible for one more afterwards.
AIUI, no.

Quote from: 22nd Amendment
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.
It is totally dependant upon when they have to take over, without considering the timewise state of the office-holder they take over from.

No matter when Vance gets the position during the next stint (or before, if it's forced to happen prior to Inaugoration?), he'll get the opportunity to run in his own right in 2028. If such a takeover is in 2027+ (or if '28 is another Grover-like skip term due to failure/non-standing), there's another possible (re-)election for him in 2032. Could be up to (but not beyond) 10 years of POTUSsing.

Not that I think it matters. There'll be Vance-like people ready to step up if Vance is unable or unwilling to continue, if not beyond his level, if his side of the political spectrum continues to move over and there's no effective anchor/counter-pull. And four years could well be an eon in politics, both local and world.


Personally I hated Nancy too, for her trip to Taiwan few years ago, she nearly triggered a war that summer , she’s an ugly and disgusting warmonger from what she had done…
With respect (and I mean that, it's no insincere platitude) whatever we think of Pelosi[1] she's not the one regularly running intrusive and aggressive military exercises against Taiwan. Her going there might or might not be wise, but it's hardly a casus beli in the face of the continuing provocations from "the mainland". At worst, it was posturing, but the manufactured rage didn't rely upon it.

But I'm mindful that you're going to hear different things on your side of the Great Firewall. I've had conversations with those in China who assumed I knew all about random exam scandals, but didn't know much about the incidents around the Spratly Islands/etc.


[1] Not sure I like her, and whatever political skeletons there are in the cupboard, but there's more integrity there than in certain quarters I could name.
Logged

Maximum Spin

  • Bay Watcher
  • [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] [GOES_TO_ELEVEN]
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53990 on: November 08, 2024, 02:30:25 pm »

One silver lining to that is no matter when Vance takes over, if Trump dies during his term it counts as a full term for Vance, so he’d only be eligible for one more afterwards.
It's only if he serves more than half the term.
Logged

Lord Shonus

  • Bay Watcher
  • Angle of Death
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53991 on: November 08, 2024, 02:43:35 pm »

They switched because another spineless moderate was not what they wanted. Trump promised something other than the status quo.

Every bit of data we have suggests otherwise. Literally the only thing supporting your claim is "Well, I'm a leftist, therefore I get to decree reality". Actually talk to any of the people who switched? You get things like "I'm afraid that the new illegals will take my job" or "My father was killed by the communists back home so I'll never support a socialist" or "Trump doesn't condescendingly insist he knows what's best for me and I need to shut up and do what I'm told".



I mean I’m remembering off a tidbit I can’t even remember the source of. I think it had something to do with Ford?

Perhaps I shall look it up.

Edit: 22nd Amendment. Anybody who has served two years of a term as president, having replaced somebody else who was elected as president, can only run once more.

Edit 2: Having thought about it a teeny bit, there does seem to be a massive loophole in that. Someone can only be elected president twice (or once) but if someone were to be elected president, step down in favour of their VP, and then they stand down in favour of a different VP, the third person would still be able to be elected president twice because the first VP wasn’t elected president in the first place.

Edit 3: 25th Amendment protects from that to some extent; requires both houses of Congress to approve an appointee to a VP vacancy.

What you're looking for is in the 12th Amendment

Quote
The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;

The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;

The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.

The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

Anybody who has completed two terms is, under the current Constitution, "constitutionally ineligible for the office of President" and thus cannot be Vice President.
Logged
On Giant In the Playground and Something Awful I am Gnoman.
Man, ninja'd by a potentially inebriated Lord Shonus. I was gonna say to burn it.

McTraveller

  • Bay Watcher
  • This text isn't very personal.
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53992 on: November 08, 2024, 04:01:37 pm »

Quote
"Trump doesn't condescendingly insist he knows what's best for me and I need to shut up and do what I'm told"

 :-X
Logged
This product contains deoxyribonucleic acid which is known to the State of California to cause cancer, reproductive harm, and other health issues.

Eschar

  • Bay Watcher
  • hello
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53993 on: November 08, 2024, 04:08:34 pm »

"The left just wasn't Nice enough to the people who made the choice to shift rightward so then they just :( had no choice :( but to listen to the right instead " needs to quit getting pulled out as an explanation. Stop doing MRAs' work for them damn

Quote
"Trump doesn't condescendingly insist he knows what's best for me and I need to shut up and do what I'm told"

Attributing the fact those voters have have this line of thinking to statements made by the left to those people instead of simply it being an attractive lie is an example.
« Last Edit: November 08, 2024, 04:14:33 pm by Eschar »
Logged

Random_Dragon

  • Bay Watcher
  • Psycho Bored Dragon
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53994 on: November 08, 2024, 04:47:21 pm »

Yeah that's a load of horseshit that only benefits the "your body, my choice" fascist cucks.
Logged
On DF Wiki · On DFFD

"Hey idiots, someone hacked my account to call you all idiots! Wasn't me you idiots!" seems to stretch credulity a bit.

MaxTheFox

  • Bay Watcher
  • Лишь одна дорожка да на всей земле
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53995 on: November 08, 2024, 07:39:41 pm »

What I wanted to say has been said for me.
Logged
Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, to deprive the poor of their rights and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people, making widows their prey and robbing the fatherless. What will you do on the day of reckoning, when disaster comes from afar?

Starver

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53996 on: November 08, 2024, 08:00:49 pm »

Anybody who has completed two terms is, under the current Constitution, "constitutionally ineligible for the office of President" and thus cannot be Vice President.
There was discussion (prior to the decision to go with Walz) about whether Obama could have been the VP pick, on the basis that they weren't an inelegible person[1] under the standard "three rules", and there was no element of being elected as President so that wasn't an intrinsic bar.

Which would have been perceived as loophole abuse, of course, and probably challenged all the way up through SC, but could have been allowed/not disallowed by a suitably sympathetic system. I'm sure there are other permutations that could be imagined if there's a favourable following wind.


[1] Certain theories aside.
Logged

wobbly

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53997 on: Today at 10:05:03 am »

If a journalist or pollster asked me why I voted for a candidate I'd give an answer that might be true, might be half true or might be total utter crape, depending on the situation. Possibly I don't know myself, Possibly I'm just going about my business and somebody just asked me something random.

My own experience (personal or talking to other people) is that people vote for who they always vote for, or who they like/against who they dislike, or based on anger/fear. Some people vote for rational reasons. I honestly suspect that's a minority.

Not in the least convinced Harris shifting left would have done any better. No-one has actually given a reason outside of stating it as a fact
Logged

Great Order

  • Bay Watcher
  • [SCREAMS_INTERNALLY]
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53998 on: Today at 10:45:11 am »

I think some of you have too much faith in a lot of swing voters.

I think an awful lot of them are heavily mis/uninformed. While we can argue about how they ought to be better informed, the truth is they aren't and won't be. You can tell them a bunch of stuff about tariffs or project 2025 or whatever, but they'll either not take it on board or ignore it, then choose to vote more on how they feel than with any real consideration.

Not so much malice as idiocy.
Logged
Quote
I may have wasted all those years
They're not worth their time in tears
I may have spent too long in darkness
In the warmth of my fears

Duuvian

  • Bay Watcher
  • Internet ≠ Real Life
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53999 on: Today at 11:44:56 am »

They switched because another spineless moderate was not what they wanted. Trump promised something other than the status quo.
Every bit of data we have suggests otherwise. Literally the only thing supporting your claim is "Well, I'm a leftist, therefore I get to decree reality". Actually talk to any of the people who switched? You get things like "I'm afraid that the new illegals will take my job" or "My father was killed by the communists back home so I'll never support a socialist" or "Trump doesn't condescendingly insist he knows what's best for me and I need to shut up and do what I'm told".

This is correct. The past 4 years have been a general undermining of the left, in particular by the moderates and by what I've called the security faction. What you see from Shonus here is just a continuation of it. They need someone to blame, you see. The left probably either (rarely) did not vote or more likely voted for Harris because there wasn't much choice. The populist swingers who left already had a long time ago, because what they were working towards has been stymied by the powermongering of the moderate faction for the past several elections.

An example for one of the things Shonus listed is actually pretty egregious on scale of betraying one's allies. You see, in some cities people have dared to vote for a reformist (generally lefty) prosecutor. To stop this, the security faction (who are politically conservative and right of the moderates) and the moderates to some degree specifically played up the fear of communism in communities with people who fled or were the children of those who fled communism. They falsely equated US lefties with this form of authoritarian socialism or communism, or at least sharing many of the bad features. This is inaccurate because that only looks at one axis of economic theory when the true concern of these people was the authoritarian nature of existant communism, which the American Left generally does not share, though as noted during the pandemic that may bend in a hurricane. This has been a part of what I am describing, and why these people have fucked themselves (except the security faction who will probably jobber for Trump as long as he keeps the taxdollars flowing because... conservative baddies mostly)

I just heard some horseshit on the NPR. There were some ladies who claimed to be feminists, which may be true in a general sentiment kind of way, but which sort of feminist? If you are unable to spew more than general unkindness towards men, in my opinion that does not make an effective feminist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_movements_and_ideologies

Men have plenty to blame for and I would know, but the simple fact is the Democrat party screwed itself. She wasn't a terrible person or the worst candidate ever, but there is no way she would ever make it past the primaries. It's not because of sexism or racism, it's because the bad part of the party is exploiting views on identity to ring in people who are often corrupt or not competent. In this case she was going to be a rubber stamp for the corrupt as hell security parts of our government. I have been yelling at these people for 20 years about these things and they group me in as a fucking radical when I am pretty much center left at most, because and only because I'm not in their lame ass in-club, and I say this because I have been CORRECT. In fact, I will continue to be CORRECT outside of the party if this shit continues. Own up to your fuck up or I'm out. It's time to change. Get Pelosi and  crew out and put in some young, reasonable, uncorruptable (if you can find and encourage this trait) people to do things. Get all the kissasses out who are hijacking and blocking reforms. Encourage in Rev. Barber (unless there is some reason I don't know of why this would be bad like I don't know some kind of foreign influence I haven't run across yet in news articles) instead of that wishy wash angryman on MSNBC who just doesn't seem to like certain young people and shows it frequently. Run out the assholes who keep taking things from people and expect them to like them. Do many things like this, or if that is impossible then the some things that you can realistically do instead of none of the things and you will win politically; teach the next leaders Of the True Greatness of Kingdoms and Estates to pair with modern thought on the matter and to a good and honest nature and you will also be victorious how their predecessors were struggling frequently with; but you are propping up people who are not doing a good job because asskissing and buttcovering is easy. That's why the security faction is so damn good at it.
« Last Edit: Today at 01:26:17 pm by Duuvian »
Logged
FINISHED original composition:
https://app.box.com/s/jq526ppvri67astrc23bwvgrkxaicedj

Sort of finished and awaiting remix due to loss of most recent song file before addition of drums:
https://www.box.com/s/s3oba05kh8mfi3sorjm0 <-zguit
Pages: 1 ... 3598 3599 [3600] 3601