Democratic 2020 Presidential Primary Thread

[/dev/null]

8 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Offs himself?  Or "offs" himself?  

Arkancide

[Deranged Rhino]

Why be a senator when you can be VP? One position has real power and influence, the other is the least powerful position in the political system... 

Why does she chose the one with less power? Because she knows she can't win on her own.

 

[Deranged Rhino]

(No shot to win... people are kidding themselves thinking otherwise)

 

Edited August 28, 2019 by Deranged Rhino

[Doc Brown]

46 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

(No shot to win... people are kidding themselves thinking otherwise)

Could he put Obama on the VP ticket?  Just out of curiosity?

[Hedge]

 

 

I would love to see the Trump campaign hold a contest like this. The loser would get the same thing that Warren’s winner gets.

[Koko78]

19 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

Could he put Obama on the VP ticket?  Just out of curiosity?

 

That's an interesting Constitutional question.

[Deranged Rhino]

26 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

Could he put Obama on the VP ticket?  Just out of curiosity?

 

I don't know to be honest. 

[Doc Brown]

11 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I don't know to be honest. 

I could see that as a desperation move to increase turnout.  Hey, if something happens to me this insanely popular previous president (to mostly anybody that leans left) who's 18 years younger than me will take over.

[row_33]

Constitution says you cannot be elected again if you have served two terms.

 

A too literal reading "of elected" is considered outside the intent of the Law.

 

it's been suggested a few times through the years to put an elected POTUS on the ticket but felt the Law will not be read to allow it.

 

How could someone want that job after 8 years as President?

 

 

 

Edited August 28, 2019 by row_33

[3rdnlng]

1 hour ago, row_33 said:

Constitution says you cannot be elected again if you have served two terms.

 

A too literal reading "of elected" is considered outside the intent of the Law.

 

it's been suggested a few times through the years to put an elected POTUS on the ticket but felt the Law will not be read to allow it.

 

How could someone want that job after 8 years as President?

 

 

 

Because they could be the de facto president. Sorta like all the Leftists claimed Dick Cheney was.

[row_33]

22 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Because they could be the de facto president. Sorta like all the Leftists claimed Dick Cheney was.

 

Woodrow Wilson's wife ran the White House his last few years in total incapacity

 

Not sure about Reagan's last year.....

 

NOBODY with the ego and support to win the Presidency would take a secondary position after killing themselves to get it.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 28, 2019 by row_33

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 hour ago, Koko78 said:

 

That's an interesting Constitutional question.

 

By Philip Bump-Washington Post

August 6, 2015

 

The 12th Amendment to the Constitution states that "no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States." And the 22nd Amendment, the political response to Franklin Roosevelt's impressive run of presidential victories, capped presidents to two terms. Ergo: No Clinton-Clinton or Bush-Bush. Or Biden-Obama, for that matter. Done and done, right?

 

The answer seems straightforward. But it is less straightforward than it appears.

 

Michael Dorf is a professor of constitutional law at Cornell University. In 2000, he argued that an Al Gore-Bill Clinton ticket could withstand legal scrutiny. And when we spoke by phone on Thursday, he said that he stood by that argument.

 

The rough outline of his argument is this: The 22nd Amendment doesn't say you can't be president for more than two terms. It says you can't be elected president twice. If a Biden-Obama ticket won (which we'll get to), and tragedy were to befall Joe Biden, Barack Obama could become president, according to the letter of the law (which we'll also get to), since he wasn't elected to the position. As such, Obama is not constitutionally ineligible to serve as president.

 

What's more, Dorf said, the case of Powell v. McCormack in 1968 established precedent for a narrow reading of what constitutes "eligibility." In that case, the House sought to prevent Adam Clayton Powell from being sworn in as a representative, arguing that the Constitution gave them the ability to "be the judge of ... qualifications" to sit in the House. The Supreme Court disagreed, deciding that the House couldn't add new qualifications (in Powell's case, that he faced legal problems) by which to deem someone eligible.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/06/could-joe-biden-pick-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate-yes-but/

 

 

[row_33]

11 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

By Philip Bump-Washington Post

August 6, 2015

 

The 12th Amendment to the Constitution states that "no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States." And the 22nd Amendment, the political response to Franklin Roosevelt's impressive run of presidential victories, capped presidents to two terms. Ergo: No Clinton-Clinton or Bush-Bush. Or Biden-Obama, for that matter. Done and done, right?

 

The answer seems straightforward. But it is less straightforward than it appears.

 

Michael Dorf is a professor of constitutional law at Cornell University. In 2000, he argued that an Al Gore-Bill Clinton ticket could withstand legal scrutiny. And when we spoke by phone on Thursday, he said that he stood by that argument.

 

The rough outline of his argument is this: The 22nd Amendment doesn't say you can't be president for more than two terms. It says you can't be elected president twice. If a Biden-Obama ticket won (which we'll get to), and tragedy were to befall Joe Biden, Barack Obama could become president, according to the letter of the law (which we'll also get to), since he wasn't elected to the position. As such, Obama is not constitutionally ineligible to serve as president.

 

What's more, Dorf said, the case of Powell v. McCormack in 1968 established precedent for a narrow reading of what constitutes "eligibility." In that case, the House sought to prevent Adam Clayton Powell from being sworn in as a representative, arguing that the Constitution gave them the ability to "be the judge of ... qualifications" to sit in the House. The Supreme Court disagreed, deciding that the House couldn't add new qualifications (in Powell's case, that he faced legal problems) by which to deem someone eligible.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/06/could-joe-biden-pick-barack-obama-as-his-running-mate-yes-but/

 

 

 

there's a million of these, i summed it up kind of tidily

 

 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

3 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

there's a million of these, i summed it up kind of tidily

 

 

 

 

....,Stumblin', mumblin' Joe picks Hillary as VP......."Bugsy Bill" has the syndicate "take care of business" and she slides into the "Big Dawg" chair....stay tuned.....

[row_33]

13 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

 

....,Stumblin', mumblin' Joe picks Hillary as VP......."Bugsy Bill" has the syndicate "take care of business" and she slides into the "Big Dawg" chair....stay tuned.....

 

no argument against Hillary being eligible to run as VP

 

i can shudder but that won't stop it

 

LBJ was the only politician on record that talked a lot about his best chance at being POTUS was going in as Veep and an assassination puts him in charge

 

 

[3rdnlng]

10 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

 

....,Stumblin', mumblin' Joe picks Hillary as VP......."Bugsy Bill" has the syndicate "take care of business" and she slides falls into the "Big Dawg" chair....stay tuned.....

FIFY

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 minute ago, row_33 said:

 

no argument against Hillary being eligible to run as VP

 

i can shudder but that won't stop it

 

LBJ was the only politician on record that talked a lot about his best chance at being POTUS was going in as Veep and an assassination puts him in charge

 

 

 

HINT; major, MAJOR sarcasm.......it is woefully inept, unqualified, vile, egotistical and financially driven scourge just like her husband and their "syndicate"....Clinton served two terms...then they prop up the cardboard Chicago cutout, a junior state senator at that with no experience, running solely on his race and propped up with the most scurrilous ex-Clintonites on earth for two MORE terms......so the "syndicate" had a 16 year stranglehold on US politics..imagine if the pant suit won and was re-elected?.....24 years of the syndicate?....ain't enough chlorine on the planet to clean up "that swamp".....sure as hell hope AG Barr has the gonads to do his "cleanup"........

[DC Tom]

49 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

 

....,Stumblin', mumblin' Joe picks Hillary as VP......."Bugsy Bill" has the syndicate "take care of business" and she slides into the "Big Dawg" chair....stay tuned.....

 

Dan Quayle and Joe Biden were "assassination insurance" - nobody in their right mind was going to shoot Bush or Obama knowing that either of those two Howdy-Doody-brained ***** were next in line.

 

Hillary...more like "assassination assurance."  

[Hedge]

Well, she still has her brand. 

 

 

 

Edited August 28, 2019 by Hedge

[B-Man]

LOL............

 

 

 

 

.

[Deranged Rhino]

[B-Man]

HOWIE CARR: Lefty media rushes to puff up Elizabeth Warren.

 

Want to write a puff piece about the fake Indian, Elizabeth Warren?

 

Take a ticket!

 

It used to be that the Boston Globe practically had a monopoly on slobbering, unctuous flattery of the erstwhile Native American, the first woman of color at Harvard, emeritus.

 

It wasn’t enough for the Boring Broadsheet to pretend that the New England Historical and Genealogical Society hadn’t busted her melanin-impaired grift, or to peddle fake statistics about her scam DNA test. No, the bow-tied bumkissers also penned hagiographies of her dead dog (Otis), her new dog (Bailey) and her campaign headquarters in Charlestown (complete with a cameo appearance by Bailey).

 

But the Globe is one busy Democrat fanzine these days, what with having to break out the pom-poms for, among others, Ed Markey (he may be a doddering old fool, but he’s our doddering old fool), JoJoJo Kennedy (look, a Kennedy! And he has red hair!), and of course Seth Moulton (America’s loss is Essex County’s gain, or something).

 

So when it comes to open and gross cheerleading for Lieawatha, there’s an open lane, and boy, are the Democrat operatives with press passes rushing to fill the void.

 

The thesis is that Fauxcahontas is, well, thoughtful and substantive, plus you always have to mention, as the New Republic gushed, “her passion, her intellect and her lack of artifice.”

 

Here’s how Lieawatha’s thoughtful, substantive policies work:

 

Bernie Sanders goes in front of some whining group of self-proclaimed victims demanding handouts, and promises them, say, $10 trillion.

 

 

So the fake Indian follows and says, I’ll raise you, Bernie – how’s $20 trillion in handouts sound?

 

 

 

 

 

Pretty much.

.

[DC Tom]

6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Best.  Troll.  EVER. 

[RochesterRob]

46 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Dan Quayle and Joe Biden were "assassination insurance" - nobody in their right mind was going to shoot Bush or Obama knowing that either of those two Howdy-Doody-brained ***** were next in line.

 

Hillary...more like "assassination assurance."  

  Yep, nobody is asking Hillary to join a ticket with them.  

[Buffalo_Gal]

Things are getting chippy in NYC:
 

 

[B-Man]

 

 

IT’S COME TO THIS: Beto O’Rourke Campaign Claims Breitbart.com Reporter Joel Pollak Ejected to Protect Black Students.

 

“A Breitbart spokesperson hit back shortly after the O’Rourke campaign’s statement: ‘The false accusation that Breitbart is racist, or that its award-winning reporter — an Orthodox Jew, married to a black woman who serves in the military — is either racist or would make anyone at a black university uncomfortable is absurd.

 

The irony of Mr. O’Rourke — who has stated himself that he is the beneficiary of ‘white privilege’ — purporting to decide for black students who should be banned from events that are open to the press, or what they should feel, is not lost on us.’”

 

As Bryan Preston noted in 2012 when CNN’s Jay Thomas tried to play the race card on Pollak, “Meet Julia Pollak… She’s from South Africa, actually, and her mother was a political appointee of none other than Nelson Mandela. Here she is, in video made when Pollak ran for Congress.”

 

 

 

 

Fortunately, today’s racism by the O’Rourke campaign had a happy ending: Beto O’Rourke Campaign: Breitbart Won’t Be Banned from More Events.

 

Of course, the number of events remaining may or may not be all that many: Beto O’Rourke Is Still Polling In Bottom Tier of Candidates After His El Paso Response.

 

Exit questions:

 

“That’s pretty racist; [O’Rourke] needs to shield them from [Pollak] because they can’t take care of themselves? Because you are threat to them? Or because?”

 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

13 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

what a F'ing troll that man is.   

 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

13 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

...now I'm really depressed.........

[DC Tom]

17 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

And you know...one of the reasons this is so funny is because it's atypically coherent of him.  

[row_33]

22 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

And you know...one of the reasons this is so funny is because it's atypically coherent of him.  

 

it's really him when it's not spell-checked or there are needless capital letters

 

[Buffalo_Gal]

short thread:
 

 

[Doc Brown]

 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

...how or why would you have serious concerns about Dem candidates...they love to cannibalize themselves with no fear of demonstrating their ignorance...wow!...this gang would NEVER make O'Rourke's "F Troop"......SMH...best to offer?........

CNN fails to bleep out Beto's F-bomb during gun control rant following shooting

By Nick Givas | Fox News

 

CNN failed to bleep out an F-bomb dropped by 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke on Sunday, after he became frustrated with what he sees as America's lack of action on gun control following Saturday's mass shooting in his home state of Texas.

O'Rourke appeared on "State of the Union" to discuss the shooting rampage that occurred in West Texas, which left seven dead, and 19 injured. The male suspect, who reportedly was in his 30s, was shot and killed by police.

"We're averaging about 300 mass shootings a year, no other country comes close -- so yes, this is f---ed up," he told CNN. "And if we don't call it out for what it is... then we will continue to have this kind of bloodshed in America."

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/beto-orourke-2020-cnn-gun-control-cursing

 

 

Daniel Turner: Labor Day betrayal – Ocasio-Cortez leads Dem candidates to embrace anti-labor policies

By Daniel Turner | Fox News

 

Democratic presidential candidates are crisscrossing the nation claiming to be the champions of blue-collar workers and demonizing President Trump as the champion of the rich and powerful who doesn’t care about working men and women. But these claims have no basis in fact.

This Labor Day weekend is a good time to separate Democratic rhetoric from reality and see how the dramatically different policies that President Trump and his Democratic would-be challengers embrace would impact American workers.

A reality check shows that Trump policies encouraging domestic energy production have created jobs, strengthened our economy, and reduced the amount of money we must spend to import energy from other nations – including some hostile to our interests.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/daniel-turner-labor-day-fact-check-shows-dem-presidential-candidates-embrace-anti-labor-policies

 

 

 

Edited September 1, 2019 by OldTimeAFLGuy

[B-Man]

 

 

Kamala continues to flame out.........................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Of course, we’re deprived of any painfully honest discussion of how much the Democrats need black voters in big cities to control the electoral votes of the swing states and why they’re having trouble getting these votes in the post-Obama era.”

 

 

 

 

 

.

Edited September 3, 2019 by B-Man

[RochesterRob]

7 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Kamala continues to flame out.........................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Of course, we’re deprived of any painfully honest discussion of how much the Democrats need black voters in big cities to control the electoral votes of the swing states and why they’re having trouble getting these votes in the post-Obama era.”

 

 

 

 

 

.

  The Queen is not writing any rep checks nor is parliament.  Thus the lack of interest of hounding mother England.

[B-Man]

 

 

 Democratic Presidential Clown Car Update. “

 

Gillibrand is Out, CNN is going to subject America to 7 hours of climate change blather because they hate America (and ratings), Biden suffers imaginary flashbacks, and the next debates loom.”

 

 

 

 

.

[SoCal Deek]

Reading Kamala’s comments makes it clear that the Dems are worried about a splintered black voting block. The challenge with being the rainbow coalition party is that every stripe of the rainbow is constantly striving for attention. Focus on the black vote, and the Latino vote feels ignored. Pay attention to the Latinos and the white LGBQT woke folks say ‘what about us’? The root of the problem is that they have no central message for America. Diversity breeds infighting!

[row_33]

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

Reading Kamala’s comments makes it clear that the Dems are worried about a splintered black voting block. The challenge with being the rainbow coalition party is that every stripe of the rainbow is constantly striving for attention. Focus on the black vote, and the Latino vote feels ignored. Pay attention to the Latinos and the white LGBQT woke folks say ‘what about us’? The root of the problem is that they have no central message for America. Diversity breeds infighting!

 

for sure, jobs means votes for Trump

 

they are wasting all their resources on racism, this wouldn't be happening if losing key demographics wasn't a huge threat to the Dems

 

they know they have a snowball's chance at this point in time

 

 

Edited September 3, 2019 by row_33

[B-Man]

 

HMM: The Democrats’ Growing Threat of a Third-Party Run. 

 

“So many candidates, so many left-wing demands, someone is bound to take the Independent route.”

While a moderate Democrat threat is unlikely, with so few in the field, it is not out of the question. Four years ago, moderate Democrats still controlled the Party. They are still a group Democrats cannot afford to lose.

 

According to 2016 exit polling, Clinton received 52 percent of moderate votes. Presumably, many are still long-time Democrats. Once Bullock or Delaney drops out (and currently Real Clear Politics’ average of national polling has them at a combined 1.4 percent in the primary field), they could be a moderate landing space.

 

The Democrats’ far bigger Independent threat comes from their burgeoning left. According to Real Clear Politics’ latest national polling average, 59.9 percent of Democrats are currently supporting candidates on the left. For comparison, Sanders received just 43.2 percent of Democrat votes in 2016.

 

Such rapid expansion raises increased expectations. The Democrats’ crowded and competitive left-centric field will only stoke these. Inevitably, all will not be realized — particularly as the nominee tries to pivot to the center in the general election. This could open the door to any of many left candidates and supporters left out.

 

 

 

Wouldn’t that be nice?

 

 

 

 

.

 

[Deranged Rhino]