Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bill Clinton as VP: Good or bad for the ticket?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Bush loves Jiang Donating Member (505 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 07:21 PM
Original message
Bill Clinton as VP: Good or bad for the ticket?
I know it won't happen, but it's fun to imagine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mb7588a Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. He isn't even eligible.
Edited on Tue Dec-30-03 07:23 PM by mb7588a
12th amendment:

But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

Sorry to smash your dreams! :D Though I agree, that'd be interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burning bush Donating Member (539 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #1
11. That's not correct
there are only three requirements for eligibility to serve as POTUS - age, place of birth, and length of residency.

Clinton is eligible to serve, which is why he was able tio serve in the first place.

The only this Clinton is unable to do is to get elected President.

Technically, Clinton could run as a VP, and even assume the office of the Presidency for whatever length of time required until an election came up.

It's all technicalities, but Constitutionally sound.

BUT...is it a good idea? Nah.. We can do this without Bill, and all his baggage.

Clinton is much more effective as a senior statemsman than as a candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tedoll78 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 10:30 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Correct!
The 22nd Amendment places restrictions on one of the two routes to the Presidency, those routes being succession and election. By the 22nd rule, a person may not be elected to the office twice; it says nothing about a person holding or succeeding to the office more than twice. Thus, Clinton is legally eligible to hold the office; and since he is eligible to hold the office, he is eligible to be VP. Had the Constitution required that he be eligible to be elected President to be eligible for the VP spot, we'd be in a different bizarro scenario.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalBushFan Donating Member (831 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
2. Good, foo
don't believe it's allowed though
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catch22Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
3. Bad
Why make the most successful DEM in the last quarter century take the 2nd seat to someone else. Looks bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTLawGuy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. right
in order to be eligible for VP, the Constitution says you must be eligible to be president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Q3JR4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
5. Have we ruled out
Mrs. Clinton as VP yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. yes... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deesh Donating Member (176 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Have we ruled out Mrs. Clinton --
-- as VP yet?

I certainly have. I defend her when Rush Limbaugh's Dittoheads attack her. But she is a polarizing figure ad would lose us quite a few votes all over the place.

How about Carol Mosely Braun?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tritsofme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #9
18. CMB?
Do that and Illinois' 23 electoral votes are in question in what should be a state thats in the Dem's pocket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ironpost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
7. Bill Clinton as V P
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the law passed to allow a president to only serve two consecutive terms. Due to FDR four election wins.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
8. Big Dog is Constitutionally barred from holding the VP or Prez office.
Hillary voted for PATRIOT and IWR, so she is damaged goods like Lieberman, Kerry, Gephardt, and Edwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. not to the vast majority of Americans, who
don't see those things as disqualifying. I understand that you find her unacceptable. But if people are concerned about who would be electable, they need to take majority attitudes into account.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
revcarol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. I totally agree.
And I had such high hopes for her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Josh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. IG, IWR is one thing, but Paul Wellstone voted for the PATRIOT act -
we have to give people a break on that issue. The question is whether they were in favour of the second version, and whether or not they support a repeal or drastic change of the current one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pansypoo53219 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 08:20 PM
Response to Original message
10. no way. i want 16 years!
i want full payment for the past fucked up W years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dolstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 10:52 PM
Response to Original message
16. Allowing unicorns to run in the Kentucky derby -- good or bad?
NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Hell, I'd be willing to join a bunch of bourbon-swilling yahoos...
in order to see that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beyurslf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 12:00 AM
Response to Original message
19. He would never take the offer.
So the question is a moot point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC