2018 mid-term election

[DallasDad]

The Speaker ascends to the Presidency only if both POTUS and VPOTUS positions are empty. If POTUS is removed from office, VPOTUS moves up and nominates a new VPOTUS.

 

[WilliamSeger]

Wait; what?

If Trump were to be impeached or ruled incompetent under Amendment 25 or died, Pence would become POTUS and Pelosi would be VP even though she is from the opposition party?

I would have thought that either Orrin Hatch (President Pro-Tempore) or Mitch McConnell (Majority leader) would become VP.

Since the 25th Amendment, if Trump is impeached or kicked out and Pence is sworn in, he could name anyone to be Vice President (e.g. when Nixon resigned and Ford became President, he appointed Nelson Rockefeller as VP). Pelosi would only be President if both Trump and Pence died or got impeached at the same time.

 

[LSSBB]

Wait; what?

If Trump were to be impeached or ruled incompetent under Amendment 25 or died, Pence would become POTUS and Pelosi would be VP even though she is from the opposition party?

I would have thought that either Orrin Hatch (President Pro-Tempore) or Mitch McConnell (Majority leader) would become VP.

Nobody instantly becomes VP under the succession. It's nominated and approved.

Section 2.
Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

 

[acbytesla]

Nobody instantly becomes VP under the succession. It's nominated and approved.

Gerald Ford was nominated to VP after Spiro Agnew resigned. He then became President when Nixon resigned. He was the House minority leader when Agnew stepped down. He is the only President who was neither elected as VP or President.

 

[dudalb]

My biggest objection to Pelosi is also one of my major objections to Hillary, Trump, Biden, and Bernie: She's too damn old. So am I, so I can say that.

Add Diana Feinsteint to that list. She is 85, good chance California will have to have a special election before the term she was just releceted to expires.

 

[dudalb]

Nobody instantly becomes VP under the succession. It's nominated and approved.

The order of sucession in the US Consituion is just for filling the office of the presidency. It does not apply to the veep position. The Speaker of the House does not move up to fill the office of VP, as what happened in 1974 shows.
The New President could pull a a name out of a hat, and if the "winner" was elgible for the US Presidency, and the House and Senate would go along, said individual would be the new VP.

 

[acbytesla]

Add Diana Feinsteint to that list. She is 85, good chance California will have to have a special election before the term she was just releceted to expires.

I'm not sure of that. She seems healthy. Strom Thurmond was serving at the age of 100.

 

[Mumbles]

More important, as I've tried to point out, is that it's not the progressives in Congress who are behind this drive. The progressives in the hustings who think that it is are foolish. It's a bunch of moderate to blue dog Dems who want to get their nose into the trough. Going moderate is not going to win them 2020, so caving to this crowd would be a very bad thing. Hillary's biggest mistake was probably selling herself as Republican Lite, but that's what she and Bill always were. Fortune 500 loving centrists with a lean toward liberal (not progressive) social programs.

There's that, as well. There are some of the most conservative dems that are holding out for changes to the House rules that will give them and some republicans more power, and then some blue dog dems that have said that they want "change", but have no actual alternative.

And then you have the Jimmy Dore show, Secular Talk, and whoever, that want to just burn everything down and hope that whatever shows up next will be their dream government. These people are worthless, honestly.

I sound like a paid shill, I know, so I'll say this - Nancy Smash is the best choice, now, heading into 2019. in 2021, 2023, and so on, I'll reevaluate. I think it's important to bring up younger people for House leadership, but again, they have to stay in the House. They cannot run off to be a junior senator, or an AG for their state, although those roles are important as well. This is one area where Obama seriously failed - keeping up the party apparatus and strategy, to push for the rights of various groups.

And yes, you are correct, campaign finance reform is one area where I don't see enough talk, even among elected progressives. I hope this changes, in the very near future.

 

[Delvo]

And then you have the Jimmy Dore show, Secular Talk, and whoever, that want to just burn everything down and hope that whatever shows up next will be their dream government.

I don't know about Dore, but at least with Kyle Kulinski (Secular Talk show), that's a lie. His suggestion, Barbara Lee, is no anarchist or clueless neophyte overidealist, and I'm certain that you know it.

It's weird how severely, mind-scramblingly frantic the no-one-must-ever-dare-oppose-The-Great-Pelosi bridage has gotten, especially given that they already got what they wanted.

 

[Mumbles]

I don't know about Dore, but at least with Kyle Kulinski (Secular Talk show), that's a lie. His suggestion, Barbara Lee, is no anarchist or clueless neophyte overidealist, and I'm certain that you know it.

And Barbara Lee immediately endorsed - you guessed it, Nancy Smash.

It's weird how severely, mind-scramblingly frantic the no-one-must-ever-dare-oppose-The-Great-Pelosi bridage has gotten, especially given that they already got what they wanted.

I think it's a minimum that you provide a reasonable alternative. none of the Youtube Progressives do that.

I'll say this: I don't doubt that they wish to push US politics leftward. But I question their methods. Pelosi, for now, is an ally. Schumer is not. I have to ask why they're attacking Pelosi, and not Schumer. And I'll say straight out, I think it's sexism, regardless of Barbera Lee. They'll turn on her in a second.

 

[Trebuchet]

I'm not sure of that. She seems healthy. Strom Thurmond was serving at the age of 100.

If by "serving", you mean still harming the United States of America.

I saw him in person at my college about 1969. He was incredibly old (a bit younger than I am now), had just married a woman more than 40 years younger, and came across as a complete idiot.

 

[acbytesla]

If by "serving", you mean still harming the United States of America.

I saw him in person at my college about 1969. He was incredibly old (a bit younger than I am now), had just married a woman more than 40 years younger, and came across as a complete idiot.

Granted. I'm using that term loosely. He was always a racist pig.

 

[Minoosh]

And yes, you are correct, campaign finance reform is one area where I don't see enough talk, even among elected progressives. I hope this changes, in the very near future.

Campaign finance reform is maybe not going to appeal as a broad objective. For better or worse, the country once adopted bipartisan reforms and they were to some extent demolished by Supreme Court action. There's reason to believe this whole cycle could be repeated.

I used the phrase election "integrity" with a different priority - addressing issues such as promoting security, detecting foreign influence and addressing voter suppression. As far as financing, SCOTUS is going to get in the way of limiting corporate donations, but if disclosure requirements are rigorous at least it might be easier to see who is raking in corporate dough vs. running campaigns supported by a broad base of individuals. I don't know if increasing turnout is something that can be incentivized with legislation but it's worth exploring, maybe with small community grants to increase polling places and conduct ID drives.

Amid all the investigating that will no doubt be pursued I still want Dems to develop solid legislation that can at least pass in the House, preferably with bipartisan support. Some balance between watchdogs and wonks. Maybe with an idea to flipping more districts in 2020 - enough to make some Republicans fear general election races at least as much as being "primaried."

 

[Foolmewunz]

Campaign finance reform is maybe not going to appeal as a broad objective. For better or worse, the country once adopted bipartisan reforms and they were to some extent demolished by Supreme Court action. There's reason to believe this whole cycle could be repeated.

I used the phrase election "integrity" with a different priority - addressing issues such as promoting security, detecting foreign influence and addressing voter suppression. As far as financing, SCOTUS is going to get in the way of limiting corporate donations, but if disclosure requirements are rigorous at least it might be easier to see who is raking in corporate dough vs. running campaigns supported by a broad base of individuals. I don't know if increasing turnout is something that can be incentivized with legislation but it's worth exploring, maybe with small community grants to increase polling places and conduct ID drives.

Amid all the investigating that will no doubt be pursued I still want Dems to develop solid legislation that can at least pass in the House, preferably with bipartisan support. Some balance between watchdogs and wonks. Maybe with an idea to flipping more districts in 2020 - enough to make some Republicans fear general election races at least as much as being "primaried."

Republicans could fix the Primaried problem quite easily. And I know I could get a lot of Dem donors.... "If you lose your primary to a minority uber conservative, here ya go, run as an independent and we'll finance you from the Stop The Tea Party Blackmail Bipartisan Citizens Committee." When the general membership finds them losing seats, they'll do something to fight the well-oiled and well-financed Primarying Movement.

 

[Minoosh]

Republicans could fix the Primaried problem quite easily. And I know I could get a lot of Dem donors.... "If you lose your primary to a minority uber conservative, here ya go, run as an independent and we'll finance you from the Stop The Tea Party Blackmail Bipartisan Citizens Committee." When the general membership finds them losing seats, they'll do something to fight the well-oiled and well-financed Primarying Movement.

My ideas are crude and I'm certainly no data wonk. I just want the bipartisanship because I want to take the focus off what "House Democrats" are doing, and instead see Dems build a coalition involving a decent-sized chunk of vulnerable Republicans who can be cajoled and maybe shamed into joining Dems on on some issues.

 

[Foolmewunz]

My ideas are crude and I'm certainly no data wonk. I just want the bipartisanship because I want to take the focus off what "House Democrats" are doing, and instead see Dems build a coalition involving a decent-sized chunk of vulnerable Republicans who can be cajoled and maybe shamed into joining Dems on on some issues.

My hunch, and lordy have I been wrong before, is that the House will put more effort into undoing Trump's EOs with legislation that closes some of the loopholes and reconfirms standing law where he's found an end-around. The bills may never pass the Senate, but by ameliorating the language they could get bipartisan support. But it's window-dressing. Mitch (We Won't Pass Anything from That Democratic President) McConnell is no more likely to pass something from a Democratic House, even if it passes with a 100 vote margin. But the Dems could get a lot of mileage out of it and so could purple district Republicans - and those purple districts are becoming more and more common. The blue boxes on the Congressional map have spread through NM to AZ to NV to UT to the Pacific Coast states.

If Pelosi's half the general we think she is, she'll allow member bills for home consumption for the Get Trump brigade. And then she'll allow them to die in committee. They know that the Senate isn't going to impeach Trump, nor censure, nor call him to give evidence. So kill it in committee but let the "young turks" have their thirty minutes on C-span.

 

[thaiboxerken]

A nice thought, but who would replace her, now.

Another old woman? Seems like an odd choice.

Do I think there's a problem as far as apprenticeships? Yes, but it's worth pointing out that everyone Pelosi has apprenticed has abandoned the House for another career. Actually, this is one of her major failings. We actually need people who will pledge to stick with the House.

Look., Pelosi is an expert on vote-counting, on herding people to vote against what may make the easiest local run for the good of the nation, and so on. She's clearly far better than Boehner (who got the Pope to visit a joint session, and then bailed out) or that idiot Ryan. But her grooming a clear successor is a very good idea even though she seems to have skills that can't be taught here.

I think the next two years will be Pelosi grooming a successor. She is retiring in 2020, I'm sure of it.

 

[Delvo]

I think it's a minimum that you provide a reasonable alternative. none of the Youtube Progressives do that.

We just covered Kyle Kulinski doing so within our last couple of posts. The Young Turks had the same recommendation as him. If Jimmy Dore came up with anyone himself, I haven't seen it, but he did mention their suggestion in a positive-sounding way. So your claim is accurate for zero of the examples I'm individually aware of. This does not fill me with confidence that it's accurate for the rest.

Pelosi, for now, is an ally.

If "ally" means "willing to be dragged into deals so every bit of progress is balanced by a bit of setback", maybe.

Schumer is not. I have to ask why they're attacking Pelosi, and not Schumer.

Schumer isn't up for election to an important position within the Senate.

And I'll say straight out, I think it's sexism, regardless of Barbera Lee.

Ah, now I see it was pointless to type the above, because I'm dealing with someone who's utterly lost his/her mind (or is pretending to have done so as a gimmick).

 

[Molinaro]

The Democrats have so far picked up +38 seats in the House. There are just two left still being counted. Democrats now have the lead in both.

I seem to recall posts in the first few days after the election by Republican supporters saying words to the effect that they didn't know why Democrats were so happy. They didn't even get the +40 Blue Wave that so many were predicting.

 

[Stacko]

Gavin Newsom looks like he will be the first Democratic governor candidate since Brown 40 years ago to carry Orange County.