Bipartisan 2016 Ticket

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Southern Dad, Apr 12, 2014.

  1. Southern Dad macrumors 65816

    Southern Dad

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Location:
    Shady Dale, Georgia
    #1
    In this forum we are mostly biased either left or right. Imagine a bipartisan ticket. Once before there was actually a Republican on the short list for the VP position on a Democrat ticket. He didn't get asked. While we all know it is highly unlikely and of course, Republican would want the R on the top, while the Democrats would want the D on the top... Who would you want? I'll start.

    Governor Chris Christie (NJ-R)
    Senator Mark Warner (VA-D / Former VA Governor)

    When this country was founded the candidate that got the most votes was President. The candidate that came in second was Vice President.
     
  2. zin Suspended

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #2
    Having a bipartisan executive branch would never work in the U.S. unless it also adopted a true multi-party legislature.

    Have you seen how awful Congress functions, and you suggest bringing this into the executive branch as well?
     
  3. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #3
    I believe we actually had that once. IIRC, have a look at Lincoln's first term. I believe he was a Republican, while the vPOTUS was Democratic, or perhaps Whig.

    I can verify that later, but I believe that was right. Now, that will never happen nowadays thanks to the 22nd amendment. For it to truly happen, someone would have to take out the POTUS, vPOTUS, Speaker of the House, and President Pro Tem. Then it would all boil down to how the people voted for Congress that last election. The 22nd Amendment really through a spanner in the line of succession.

    BL.
     
  4. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
  5. iBlazed macrumors 68000

    iBlazed

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2014
    Location:
    New Jersey, United States
    #5
    Dear lord please no. It needs to be one or the other.
     
  6. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #6
    Chris Christie?

    I think we can do better, so I'll pass on that one, thanks.

    A bi-partisan Presidential ticket makes about as much sense as a viable third party candidate. In other words - its a "nice idea" that runs into the buzz saw of political reality.

    To begin with, the Vice President has pretty much zero power. And the only way he or she could get some is if the President dies while in office. Can you say conflict of interest?

    Secondly, I think it fair to say that such an idea presently holds appeal only to Republicans. Thanks to Gerrymandering and Vote Suppression, the GOP has managed to create semi-permanent a House Majority, and look to strongly build their Senate presence, despite garnering a significant minority of actual cast votes and voters. The one thing Republicans can't win right now is a Presidential Election, thanks mainly to their loathsome behavior on things like jobs, justice, and infrastructure.

    So: No. It will never happen, and we should be thankful it won't. We're better off passing zero legislation than letting the Republicans weasel their way into establishing the sort of Slave-Holding Theocratic Military Dictatorship they (not so secretly) dream of creating.
     
  7. Southern Dad thread starter macrumors 65816

    Southern Dad

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Location:
    Shady Dale, Georgia
    #7
    You are correct. Andrew Johnson was the Pro War Democrat who was selected by Abraham Lincoln, a Republican to be his running mate.
     
  8. localoid macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
    #8
    It happened during Lincoln's second term, not his first.

    Andrew Johnson, a "war Democrat", was Lincoln's running mate during Lincoln's second term. The Republicians used the name "National Union Party" during the 1864 presidential election.

    Hannibal Hamlin was Lincoln's running mate during Lincoln's first term. Hamlin switched parties, from Democratic to Republican, in 1956.
     
  9. Southern Dad thread starter macrumors 65816

    Southern Dad

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Location:
    Shady Dale, Georgia
    #9
    I believe you are mistaken. Hannibal Hamlin died July 4th, 1891.
     
  10. localoid macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
    #10
    What did I say that you think is wrong and what does his death in 1891 have to do with the subject?

    See: Hannibal Hamlin.
     
  11. chown33 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Location:
    Sailing beyond the sunset
    #11
    You wrote 1956, rather than 1856. He's complaining about a typo (or, since it involves a number, a numero).
     
  12. ElectronGuru, Apr 12, 2014
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2014

    ElectronGuru macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2013
    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    #12
    This is my first impression. The latest in a long list of technical maneuvers designed to offset demographic and ideological losses. You don't have to appeal to more people, if you can reduce their relevance.

    We're going to end up destroying our democracy, trying to save it.
     
  13. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #13
    We kind of have that now. President Obama is a bit conservative for my taste, while Biden is slightly liberal. But, as every VP from John Adams until now has noted, the office of VP, while kind of necessary, is actually kind of a pain to occupy. Every VP except Dick Cheney, that is.
     
  14. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #14
    Hey, I think we should just change the rules, get rid of this "ticket" concept, let voters choose Prez and VP separately.
     
  15. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030

    Macky-Mac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    #15
    It wouldn't really change things since the VP is mostly a powerless position
     
  16. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #16
    So is the president it seems. When is the last time we had a president with balls that didn't listen to his party.
     
  17. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #17
    I don't really care about whether they're bipartisan. Part of the problem is the duopoly.
     
  18. Southern Dad thread starter macrumors 65816

    Southern Dad

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Location:
    Shady Dale, Georgia
    #18
    Oh, I don't know about that. The left sure holds George W Bush responsible for all the things that happened during his term. It's just another standard for the current figurehead in the Oval Office.
     
  19. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #19
    A president follows party lines, there should not be a letter near his name once he takes office. He should be looking out for the country not the party. Party influence should stop the second the campaign is over.
     
  20. Southern Dad thread starter macrumors 65816

    Southern Dad

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Location:
    Shady Dale, Georgia
    #20
    The Vice President is the deciding vote in the US Senate. This could be very important.
     
  21. sviato macrumors 68020

    sviato

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Location:
    HR 9038 A
    #21
    Hmm idk, Cheney was pretty gangster :D
     
  22. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #22
    I'm more interested in whether or not the President caves in to big corporate monopolies and the super-rich. Starting with TR, and subsequently, FDR and Truman directly challenged the big corporations. Their policies set the agenda for the subsequent decades of economic growth and limited corporate political power. Most of Eisenhower-Carter maintained the status quo. (Barry Goldwater famously called Eisenhower a "dime-store New Dealer"). Reagan really did change the course of the country, re-empowering the large corporations, and re-structuring the tax code such that inequality grew rapidly. Here we are, 30+ years later, with the wealthiest 1% the planet has ever seen. Some people are happy with that, others are not.
     
  23. ElectronGuru macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2013
    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    #23
    The ticket comes from the parties. If we could do away with the parties, we wouldn't need the ticket. Though given that we tried not to have parties the first time (humans just gravitate toward coalition), the answer seems to be more parties, not less.
     
  24. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #24
    Pretty much he stupidest political idea I've ever heard. Why the hell would you want a VP that has different policy positions than the man/woman you voted for? The VP pretty much has 2 jobs (OK, three if you count going to state funerals), break a tie in the Senate and assume the Presidency if the President dies or becomes incapacitated. Why would you want to elect for a person who likely holds different positions that the President you voted for?
     
  25. Southern Dad thread starter macrumors 65816

    Southern Dad

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Location:
    Shady Dale, Georgia
    #25
    Thank you all for insulting the idea. I noticed that no one even had any suggestions just insults. This forum is a politically polarized as our country is.

    As I stated in the beginning it isn't something that is likely to happen but an across the aisle ticket has been considered in the past. In 2004, Senator John Kerry's (D) people vetted Senator John McCain (R) as a potential running mate. Even our current Vice President Joe Biden endorsed it. It was called the Unity Ticket.

    Polls at the time showed that a Kerry/McCain ticket would have had a chance against Bush/Cheney.

    Biden endorses a Kerry-McCain ticket - NBC News 03/17/2004

    Poll: McCain/Kerry Ticket a Winner - CBS News 03/13/2002
     

Share This Page