• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

so what was your thought about clinton as VP?

According to most constitutional scholars, it is perfectly legal.

They mentioned it as a tiny possibility on some news channel.
 
Originally posted by: Howard
Oh...

I don't see it as a problem. I think Kerry would have his own ideas about running the state.

the topic is about if he's elgible or not , constitutionally, to run as a VP with Kerry. i think he is, anybody think otherwise?
 
He can run with him and serve as VP, he'll simply have to abdicate to the Speaker in the event of presidential succession as he is not eligble to serve as president anymore.
 
Originally posted by: AlienCraft
He can run with him and serve as VP, he'll simply have to abdicate to the Speaker in the event of presidential succession as he is not eligble to serve as president anymore.

Yes, just like the case when Henry K. was the Sec. of State, he's not eligible due to his birth place.
 
why would we want someone who undeniably lied under oath in front of national television in office again? Why is clinton not in jail like martha stewart! 🙁 grr
 
Originally posted by: Savarak
why would we want someone who undeniably lied under oath in front of national television in office again? Why is clinton not in jail like martha stewart! 🙁 grr

at least his lies didnt cost the lives of american soldiers =/
 
Originally posted by: Savarak
why would we want someone who undeniably lied under oath in front of national television in office again? Why is clinton not in jail like martha stewart! 🙁 grr

because this "someone" did not have to explain his action from what he did in his private life to begin with. and nevertheless, because this "someone" brought an excellent economy that the american public haven't witnessed for 50 years.
 
Originally posted by: Savarak
why would we want someone who undeniably lied under oath in front of national television in office again? Why is clinton not in jail like martha stewart! 🙁 grr

Or Bush for that matter?

Not relevant to the OP, at least as I understand it. CAN Clinton be VP? Sure. It's not prohibited Constitutionally, therefore it is permissible. Will it? No, but not because of legal issues, but because it is just too damn weird. Kerry wouldn't want to have his VP casting a longer shadow than he, and most people (I believe) would understand that it would give the appearance of that.

People have been saying that Cheney is running the show often enough, so imagine the consequences of Clinton being VP.
 
Originally posted by: ucdbiendog
Originally posted by: Savarak
why would we want someone who undeniably lied under oath in front of national television in office again? Why is clinton not in jail like martha stewart! 🙁 grr

at least his lies didnt cost the lives of american soldiers =/

zing!
 
Originally posted by: AlienCraft
He can run with him and serve as VP, he'll simply have to abdicate to the Speaker in the event of presidential succession as he is not eligble to serve as president anymore.

ok so you're sayng he's not elgible?

but then you would have to admit that he's not elgible to run as a VP either. because under the 12th amendment it reads as , "one who is not elgible to be president, cannot be VP". so there's a contradiction in your beliefs.

however, i'm saying he's elgible as a President , thus he'd be elgible for VP as well.

22nd amendment says "one who has served 2 terms of presidency cannot be elected as a president again". keyword here is ELECTED. Clinton wouldn't necessarily be president through an electoral college, but if Kerry were to die, resign, or be impeached, then Clinton would be president by default, and not by election (elctoral college), therefore he's elgible to become President in the circumstances i described. and this would also loop around the 12th amendment, the fact that we already established him being elgible to become President doesnt prevent him from becoming VP.

anybody thinks this to be wrong?
 
if he was vp and kerry died he could become president. laws only state he cannot be elected for more than 2 terms.
 
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Originally posted by: Savarak
why would we want someone who undeniably lied under oath in front of national television in office again? Why is clinton not in jail like martha stewart! 🙁 grr

Or Bush for that matter?

Not relevant to the OP, at least as I understand it. CAN Clinton be VP? Sure. It's not prohibited Constitutionally, therefore it is permissible. Will it? No, but not because of legal issues, but because it is just too damn weird. Kerry wouldn't want to have his VP casting a longer shadow than he, and most people (I believe) would understand that it would give the appearance of that.

People have been saying that Cheney is running the show often enough, so imagine the consequences of Clinton being VP.

uhm, i think, they said he was not elgible, constitutionally, to run for VP, and this is why i'm bringing up the issue. they said he's not elgible through 12th amendment (this was on the news on monday i believe)
 
Originally posted by: Bacardi151
Originally posted by: AlienCraft
He can run with him and serve as VP, he'll simply have to abdicate to the Speaker in the event of presidential succession as he is not eligble to serve as president anymore.

ok so you're sayng he's not elgible?

but then you would have to admit that he's not elgible to run as a VP either. because under the 12th amendment it reads as , "one who is not elgible to be president, cannot be VP". so there's a contradiction in your beliefs.

however, i'm saying he's elgible as a President , thus he'd be elgible for VP as well.

22nd amendment says "one who has served 2 terms of presidency cannot be elected as a president again". keyword here is ELECTED. Clinton wouldn't necessarily be president through an electoral college, but if Kerry were to die, resign, or be impeached, then Clinton would be president by default, and not by election (elctoral college), therefore he's elgible to become President in the circumstances i described. and this would also loop around the 12th amendment, the fact that we already established him being elgible to become President doesnt prevent him from becoming VP.

anybody thinks this to be wrong?

I believe you have the correct interpretion.

The only reason he would be excluded is because the 22nd prohibits his election. Since he would not be elected, the 12th would not apply, since the only thing the 22nd prohibits is his election to the office of the President.
 
Originally posted by: Bacardi151
Originally posted by: AlienCraft
He can run with him and serve as VP, he'll simply have to abdicate to the Speaker in the event of presidential succession as he is not eligble to serve as president anymore.

ok so you're sayng he's not elgible?

but then you would have to admit that he's not elgible to run as a VP either. because under the 12th amendment it reads as , "one who is not elgible to be president, cannot be VP". so there's a contradiction in your beliefs.

however, i'm saying he's elgible as a President , thus he'd be elgible for VP as well.

22nd amendment says "one who has served 2 terms of presidency cannot be elected as a president again". keyword here is ELECTED. Clinton wouldn't necessarily be president through an electoral college, but if Kerry were to die, resign, or be impeached, then Clinton would be president by default, and not by election (elctoral college), therefore he's elgible to become President in the circumstances i described. and this would also loop around the 12th amendment, the fact that we already established him being elgible to become President doesnt prevent him from becoming VP.

anybody thinks this to be wrong?
hmmmmm you may be right about that....

😀
 
The VP does nothing anyway, so it doesn't really matter. Most VPs only settle for that position because it usually means a high chance of winning the presidential election when they run.
 
Originally posted by: FoBoT
Originally posted by: Pepsei
This should go to P&N,

^^^

politics suck!

Politics sucks indeed. However this is not about "politics". This is about Constitutional law, a theoretical exercise if you will. If this should go then every reference to anything that comes up that could loosely be defined as news should go there too. That would include NFS4's car threads, because new models are "news". Any reference to 9/11 or major earthquakes or whatever also.

You would rightly be stuck with "Look how much pus I got out of this zit!" threads.
 
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Originally posted by: Savarak
why would we want someone who undeniably lied under oath in front of national television in office again? Why is clinton not in jail like martha stewart! 🙁 grr

Or Bush for that matter?

Not relevant to the OP, at least as I understand it. CAN Clinton be VP? Sure. It's not prohibited Constitutionally, therefore it is permissible. Will it? No, but not because of legal issues, but because it is just too damn weird. Kerry wouldn't want to have his VP casting a longer shadow than he, and most people (I believe) would understand that it would give the appearance of that.

People have been saying that Cheney is running the show often enough, so imagine the consequences of Clinton being VP.

just the better if Clinton runs the show, he was a great president in terms of how he did politically and economically for this nation.
 
Back
Top