Warren ends campaign

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Jan 25, 2011
16,699
8,907
146
But he's not constitutionally ineligible to be president, just elected president. The constitution states election, not permission to be.
Validly it would face legal scrutiny but I do believe the intent and likely interpretation would have been to prevent the kind of back door presidency that is being discussed here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: [DHT]Osiris

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,284
13,581
146
Validly it would face legal scrutiny but I do believe the intent and likely interpretation would have been to prevent the kind of back door presidency that is being discussed here.
I'm sure we can get our elected representatives to fire off an amendment with bipartisan support to fix that one, in a jiffy.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: pcgeek11

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,632
50,853
136
I would think she would endorse Bernie. If she doesn't then I assume it is out of spite, for whatever things have happened between them, but from a pure policy standpoint, the obvious choice is Bernie.

I suspect the reason she hasn't endorsed Bernie is because she doubts his ability to win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ivwshane

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
24,222
10,877
136
I don't know. My guess is he offers a chance to Stacey Abrams but I don't know if she has a desire to be "token black woman". Pete is probably a safe 2nd bet for a young gun on the bench and will help him in Iowa and some other Midwest states.

I don't even know if Biden has a desire to run a second term. He may just be looking for someone to groom and take the wheel.
Biden's response said among other things that he (Biden) will be looking forward to working with her in the Senate. Kind of telling.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,548
15,424
136
Sander's currently making appeal to Warren voters.

It certainly sounded like he was not only trying to appeal to her voters but to her as well.



Here is a crazy thought; could both Biden and sanders say they will pick warren as a VP and warren say that she will support whoever wins the nomination? It would show the voters that democratic unity is what’s important.


On a side note; while I think warren is an effective senator and should stay there IF the Dems can’t take the senate, she is also very effective at pushing/explaining policy to the public and having her as the VP would help whoever the president is in regards to selling the public on policy ideas.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,231
5,806
126
It certainly sounded like he was not only trying to appeal to her voters but to her as well.



Here is a crazy thought; could both Biden and sanders say they will pick warren as a VP and warren say that she will support whoever wins the nomination? It would show the voters that democratic unity is what’s important.


On a side note; while I think warren is an effective senator and should stay there IF the Dems can’t take the senate, she is also very effective at pushing/explaining policy to the public and having her as the VP would help whoever the president is in regards to selling the public on policy ideas.

I doubt Biden/Sanders would accept that arrangement. They need/want the Bump of Support.
 

Printed Circuit Bro

Senior member
Jan 21, 2020
411
84
61
But he's not constitutionally ineligible to be president, just elected president. The constitution states election, not permission to be.
The Constitution also gives a maximum amount of time someone can be president regardless of being elected or not, a maximum of 10 years.

The amendment was passed by Congress in 1947, and was ratified by the states on February 27, 1951. The Twenty-Second Amendment says a person can only be elected to be president two times for a total of eight years. It does make it possible for a person to serve up to ten years as president. This can happen if a person (most likely the Vice-President) takes over for a president who can no longer serve their term. If this person serves two years or less of the preceding President’s term, he or she may serve for two more four-year terms. If he or she served more than two years of the last President's term, the new President can serve only one full four-year term. Under the language of the amendment, the President at the time of its ratification (Harry Truman) was exempt from the two-term limitation. Truman served nearly all of Roosevelt's unexpired fourth term and then was elected President once, serving his own four year term.

 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,676
5,238
136
I was also disappointed with her attacks on everyone. Still think she would make a great AG.

Generally I think there is a good position in the cabinet for her, however, one note I saw is that MA has an R governor, and if she left she would have an R replace her seat. Obviously Ds can't afford that, so she's most valuable keeping her seat.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,284
13,581
146
The Constitution also gives a maximum amount of time someone can be president regardless of being elected or not, a maximum of 10 years.

The amendment was passed by Congress in 1947, and was ratified by the states on February 27, 1951. The Twenty-Second Amendment says a person can only be elected to be president two times for a total of eight years. It does make it possible for a person to serve up to ten years as president. This can happen if a person (most likely the Vice-President) takes over for a president who can no longer serve their term. If this person serves two years or less of the preceding President’s term, he or she may serve for two more four-year terms. If he or she served more than two years of the last President's term, the new President can serve only one full four-year term. Under the language of the amendment, the President at the time of its ratification (Harry Truman) was exempt from the two-term limitation. Truman served nearly all of Roosevelt's unexpired fourth term and then was elected President once, serving his own four year term.

Ehh, close but not quite, here's the text:
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.

Again, the text says elected. If they aren't elected president, it's technically skirting the constitutional amendment. If that last line was 'shall serve in the office of the Presidency' that'd be different.
 

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
62,483
8,344
126
Generally I think there is a good position in the cabinet for her, however, one note I saw is that MA has an R governor, and if she left she would have an R replace her seat. Obviously Ds can't afford that, so she's most valuable keeping her seat.

Correct. And there were quite a few voters that noted that in their decision on exit polls. "We'd rather have her here".
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,133
30,084
146
I don't know what's best for Warren, but no way is it a good idea for Biden to pick another white male moderate for VP. Warren would be a much better choice for him.

you're not wrong, but it's the difference between politicking and doing actual work and what is really relevant in the end. It may "look better" to have someone like Warren campaigning with him on the ticket, but it effectively neuters her in every way that people want her in leadership positions.
 

m8d

Senior member
Nov 5, 2012
638
1,025
136
No regrets with my vote after listening to her presser. America just isn’t a place where the best person = the best candidate/winning candidate—and we need to figure out why.

I’m not crying, you are!!
America loves mediocrity.
 

Printed Circuit Bro

Senior member
Jan 21, 2020
411
84
61
No regrets with my vote after listening to her presser. America just isn’t a place where the best person = the best candidate/winning candidate—and we need to figure out why.

I’m not crying, you are!!
The problem with this is that "best" is subjective. "Best" candidate to one person isn't even a viable candidate to another.

There is no "best" candidate.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
24,222
10,877
136
If you watch the interview of Sanders on TRMS last night, Bernie really had no answers as to why less young voters showed up than in 2016. Not showing up, has consequences.
 

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
62,483
8,344
126
If you watch the interview of Sanders on TRMS last night, Bernie really had no answers as to why less young voters showed up than in 2016. Not showing up, has consequences.

And it's not just young. It's also educated women. My wife has Dr. in front of her name, donated to Warren and cursed the day Biden jumped into the race. She has no palate for Bernie what so ever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zorba

Sunburn74

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2009
5,037
2,615
136
If you watch the interview of Sanders on TRMS last night, Bernie really had no answers as to why less young voters showed up than in 2016. Not showing up, has consequences.
Bernie would be stupid not to pick either her or Stacy Adams. He needs the youth support and the votes of Southerners.

Warren was my choice through this whole process but with her out I gotta go with Bernie.
 

repoman0

Diamond Member
Jun 17, 2010
4,701
3,727
136
Generally I think there is a good position in the cabinet for her, however, one note I saw is that MA has an R governor, and if she left she would have an R replace her seat. Obviously Ds can't afford that, so she's most valuable keeping her seat.

Charlie Baker is a fake republican, or rather what the R party should be. He has nothing in common with the mainstream party anymore and would probably replace her with a D. If he didn't we'd vote him out immediately but as it is, one of the most liberal states in the nation keeps giving him his job back.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
36,125
30,518
136
Generally I think there is a good position in the cabinet for her, however, one note I saw is that MA has an R governor, and if she left she would have an R replace her seat. Obviously Ds can't afford that, so she's most valuable keeping her seat.
Yes, clearly her Senate seat should be part of this calculus. Gaining the Senate majority is almost as important as removing Trump. Almost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
36,125
30,518
136
Charlie Baker is a fake republican, or rather what the R party should be. He has nothing in common with the mainstream party anymore and would probably replace her with a D. If he didn't we'd vote him out immediately but as it is, one of the most liberal states in the nation keeps giving him his job back.
I think you are underestimating the likelihood of MA giving her seat to the GOP. They already did with Brown and he might want another shot at it if she vacates it.
 

repoman0

Diamond Member
Jun 17, 2010
4,701
3,727
136
I think you are underestimating the likelihood of MA giving her seat to the GOP. They already did with Brown and he might want another shot at it if she vacates it.

I doubt it, Baker knows it'd be the end of his political career here if he did that. Policywise I have no idea why he doesn't just call himself a Democrat.
 
Feb 4, 2009
35,245
16,716
136
It certainly sounded like he was not only trying to appeal to her voters but to her as well.



Here is a crazy thought; could both Biden and sanders say they will pick warren as a VP and warren say that she will support whoever wins the nomination? It would show the voters that democratic unity is what’s important.


On a side note; while I think warren is an effective senator and should stay there IF the Dems can’t take the senate, she is also very effective at pushing/explaining policy to the public and having her as the VP would help whoever the president is in regards to selling the public on policy ideas.

Sure why not.
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
80,287
17,079
136
All the candidates dropping out strikes me as amusing. I wonder what will happen if we make it to November with NO democrats on the ballot.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Thunder 57