2020 US Election (Part Two)

[Takhisis]

Yeah, but for elections during quarantine I've already proposed mail-in (absentee) ballots, which the states have been doing their best to suppress.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Yeah, but for elections during quarantine I've already proposed mail-in (absentee) ballots, which the states have been doing their best to suppress.

Certainly a good option.

 

[Birdjaguar]

He literally suggested having a member of the GOP as his vp, Like i don't know man, what are we supposed to make of this?

It is likely that Biden's VP will be president.

So Choosing a Republican would be bad form. Warren should be top of his list. If Bernie were his VP, then it is likely that Nancy P will get the job when they both step down in 2-3 years.

 

[Lexicus]

It is likely that Biden's VP will be president.

So Choosing a Republican would be bad form. Warren should be top of his list. If Bernie were his VP, then it is likely that Nancy P will get the job when they both step down in 2-3 years.

Biden picking a Republican would be more "treason" than "bad form" - but isn't Nancy P actually older than both of em?

 

[Camikaze]

Choosing Warren as VP is choosing to lose a Senate seat in MA. The governor is Republican.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Biden picking a Republican would be more "treason" than "bad form" - but isn't Nancy P actually older than both of em?

She was born on March 26 1940, so yes, she will be 80 this week! What a trio!

 

[Birdjaguar]

Choosing Warren as VP is choosing to lose a Senate seat in MA. The governor is Republican.

Bummer. That is not good.

 

[Lexicus]

Choosing Warren as VP would be foolish. She is an electoral liability.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I don't think Warren is the best choice purely due to age. Someone with some youth appeal and who can run in 2024 is what is needed.

Edit: Hilda Solis. Latina child of immigrants. Massively qualified: former Secretary of Labor, four terms in congress, currently on the LA County board of supervisors which is top level executive experience bigger than the majority of governors have. Has terrific environmental issues chops as driving force behind California's environmental justice act, among others. Strong union support when she was SecLabor.

Only downside would be that as a Californian her home state is already a lock.

 

[cardgame]

Never forget that unless we opt for some sort of epic mass executions plan the GOP isn't going away any time soon.

sold

 

[Farm Boy]

If that's rue, +1.

If that's tongue in cheek half-assed I mean it, then obligatory rot in hell with Tim sodomizing you, he's "up for it." Or whatever is as funny as "let's kill those you love." Rite?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

If that's rue, +1.

If that's tongue in cheek half-assed I mean it, then obligatory rot in hell with Tim sodomizing you, he's "up for it." Or whatever is as funny as "let's kill those you love." Rite?

The "never forget" part was serious. This "Never think you will work across the aisle ever lest you be primaried! No cooperation even if the country goes straight to hell in a handbasket! Pretend we will hold 435 and 100 forever!" nonsense spewing looks waaaaaaay too much like the "Freedom" Caucus for my taste. It is just a reality that there are going to be Republicans in congress that will have to be worked with. As to the ones in your family and mine, no, I don't favor mass executions...even leaving them aside. I think maybe some of their elected representatives have come close enough to capital crimes that I wouldn't object if they were invited to dance the hempen jig, but slaughtering the rank and file isn't something I am into.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

If that's rue, +1.

If that's tongue in cheek half-assed I mean it, then obligatory rot in hell with Tim sodomizing you, he's "up for it." Or whatever is as funny as "let's kill those you love." Rite?

What?

 

[cardgame]

If that's rue, +1.

If that's tongue in cheek half-assed I mean it, then obligatory rot in hell with Tim sodomizing you, he's "up for it." Or whatever is as funny as "let's kill those you love." Rite?

What?

 

[Sommerswerd]

Election day is just set by law...notably by a law that would have to be actively repealed, not just tacitly ignored. However the end of term is in the 20th amendment. That's the real hook, because no amount of "we are ignoring the legally mandated election day" can change the immutable constitutionally stated fact that Trump's term will end. "We didn't hold an election so I guess I'll just stay" cannot in any way be depicted as anything but a direct conflict with the constitution.

Are you thinking that if the election wasn't held, that on inauguration day Trump would legally cease to be POTUS and Pence would legally cease to be VP... making the Speaker of the House the legal POTUS?

That's War... possibly an actual, literal shooting War if Pelosi (or whoever was appointed Speaker) tried to assert that they are now POTUS...

Also... an issue like that is almost certainly ending up in the hands of the SCOTUS, and well...

EDIT: I see I've missed alot of the discussion and need to catch up

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Also... an issue like that is almost certainly ending up in the hands of the SCOTUS, and well...

You would think that the plain text of the constitution would make it an open and shut case but...

 

[Lexicus]

At the end of the day though the result would be in the hands of the military. They are sworn to defend the constitution, and the constitution very plainly states that election or no election, Trump's term ends in January.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/a...itary-not-ready-constitutional-crisis/606367/

 

[Sommerswerd]

You would think that the plain text of the constitution would make it an open and shut case but...

Hahahahahahahaha... no

For all the references you've been making over the past few years to the slow-motion coup... we might be headed for a fast-motion coup. Right now it seems like we are finally standing on the precipice of an actual collapse into outright 3rd World Dictatorship, courtesy of this pandemic.

 

[Traitorfish]

I don't see the United States military intervening to extend a Trump administration past its allotted term. For all the terror and destruction wreaked by the US military, both the ranks and the officers seem to take their status as "non-political"- that is, isolated from electoral or partisan politics- quite seriously. The military is simply not politicised in the way it is in countries prone to military coups, and even if we might suspect that senior officer are personally enthusiastic about Trump, it's not evident that they owe him any personal loyalty.

If the military did intervene, it is most likely to be on behalf of a bi-partisan caretaker administration, on behalf of "public order" rather than any particular leadership-figure.

 

[Lexicus]

I don't see the United States military intervening to extend a Trump administration past its allotted term. For all the terror and destruction wreaked by the US military, both the ranks and the officers seem to take their status as "non-political"- that is, isolated from electoral or partisan politics- quite seriously. The military is simply not politicised in the way it is in countries prone to military coups, and even if we might suspect that senior officer are personally enthusiastic about Trump, it's not evident that they owe him any personal loyalty.

I don't think it will be required. The scenario I envision is more like, the military's intervention will be necessary to end Trump's term, and they won't intervene, leaving the matter to the courts, and (to repeat myself) Trump effectively serves a second term while the litigation drags on for a few years.