If you simply go by what ticket sounds better to say, “Harris Cooper” wins by a long shot. Although it could be confused with a North Carolina supermarket chain. It sounds like a white shoe law firm and simply rolls off the tongue.
“Harris Shapiro” is a clanging gong.
“Harris Beshear” sounds like a person’s name and too ethnic.
"Section four outlines how the president may be removed from office if the vice-president and a "majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress" agree that he or she is unable to perform their duties. If approved, the vice-president becomes acting president. The president can resume office by declaring "no inability exists", but this can be challenged by the vice-president and the executive or congressional majority."
It is obvious that Biden's VP and administrative staff took advantage of Biden's senility to seize power for themselves even though he was unable to face prosecution for deliberately mishandling and sharing classified documents . Some of you say this is sorta OK because you sorta like the results regardless of it being unconstitutional and against the wishes of about 47% of the voters.
Joe Biden's puppet masters have ignored the law regarding detention of aliens and even ignored the Supreme Court's rulings regarding student loan forgiveness.
You focus on what MIGHT have happened (but did not) if Trump had similarly ignored lawful authority. What court rulings and constitutional provisions did Trump actually ignore - not ones he appealed.
Regarding Shapiro: I don't think his being Jewish is an issue (considering Kamala is married to a Jew).
The important negatives to his selection are his thin resumé and his support for school vouchers. His selection would solely be a benefit for the PA turnout, which - while important - is likely not enough to put him over the top compared to Kelly (who would bring AZ benefits, as well as benefits in other states due to his stance on immigration and guns).
Another negative for the Cooper pick: he's term-limited and Mark Robinson, the GOP candidate for the seat, is the current Lt Governor. If Cooper steps down, then Robinson becomes governor - at least for a little while.
One of the most interesting comments i read this morning regarding the Harris VP pick was the impact it had on the news cycle. In fact, Joe dropping out was a Godsend (in many ways), but it took the narrative away from trump. A tactic he has relied on since 2015.
Now with the excitement off Joe stepping aside, the VP question is consuming the airways. For my money, i would drag this out as close the convention as possible. Speculation makes for great copy, as seen above. Having fun with it makes it even more real, more entertaining. And, seeing Harris smile is refreshing, compared to the glaring and angry profile we see from trump/vance/et al.
Best part though was the remark by a trump staffer who said the worst outcome was they now needed to buy ads (32 million dollars worth) rather than relying on free promotion based on trump being so outlandish. Turning the tables is an interesting story on it's own.
Finally, after Merrie's excellent column yesterday i had a true epiphany moment. "Damn," in the immortal words of wrestler Ron Simmons. I think this may even sway our friend Cameron; my choice is now solidly locked in on Harris. Here's why; with vance hating cat (ladies) and trump hating dogs (lots of stories out there supporting that belief), why would anyone vote for candidates who hates the animals we so much love and cherish?
David Thornton voting for Harris "to keep Trump out if office." Not a very good reason to vote for someone, but I'll just say this, be careful what you wish for.
It is in fact the primary reason for anyone to vote for Harris. If one believes that Trump is not only disqualified for office, but dangerous, then there is no other reasonable choice. There'd have to be a compelling reason NOT to vote for Harris, if one believes the premise.
On the other hand, if you don't believe the premise on Trump, there is no reason to vote for anyone other than who you like better for whatever variety of reasons.
How about voting for Harris because you believe in her? How about because you share her views on issues? How about because you share her religious and moral values ( or lack thereof)? There are a myriad of reasons to vote for her if you are convinced she could be a better candidate than the other one, than just to keep the other candidate out of office.
I'm voting for Harris, because I believe in her to keep Trump out of office. We share the view that DJT should be nowhere near the levers of power again, and we share moral values such as believing that it's wrong to mock disabled people.
There's no better candidate running now that I believe in on those fronts MORE than Kamala Harris right now. (I did believe Nikki Haley could be that person in the primaries, but we see how that went.)
Quoting Trump from today: "You have to get out and vote. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four years, it will be fixed, it will be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore.. In four years, you won’t have to vote again."
If 2020 is any guide, that will be true: even with relatively high turnout, there was still more eligible voters that did not vote than voted for either Biden or Trump.
We do not live in a perfect world, and sometimes one must compromise and accept a less-than-ideal result to prevent a catastrophic one. This is something that has bedeviled the Democratic Party: getting the more Progressive/left voters to accept an incremental improvements on an issue they state they prioritize (e.g. climate) in order to continue to make progress on said issue.
Instead, you'll see those voters state that incremental improvements aren't good enough - it must be all or nothing. And then it ends up being not only nothing, but a step back - because *things can always get worse*.
So, for those who are conservatives and not Republicans ('cause Republican =/= conservative) their calculations may be that the most conservative option at this time is the Democratic Party's candidate - 'cause the alternative is worse.
MAGA maybe should have taken the advice about carefully wishing.
Biden is out but my prediction about any replacement being more progressive came true. Still, the axiom about surviving a bad policy candidate over one who will mount a frontal assault on the Constitution holds.
I think Congress would be more successful at blocking a Harris agenda than at keeping Trump leashed.
Tenses are doing a lot of heavy lifting here. “Kamala will”. But Trump did—or he did not. We have a lot of data upon which to base our decision on Trump. We only have opinions for Kamala because she’s literally done almost nothing, which is what is expected of a VP.
People said the same thing about Biden and guns. He hasn’t done anything on that score. I doubt Harris would either because of the filibuster and Supreme Court.
OTOH Trump tried to convince the country that vice presidents can overrule voters and Electoral College and claims absolute power.
FWIW, Rod B. is now #MAGA, so any anti-Pritzker ads that invoked him would be a waste of time.
That said, Pritzker would be a good choice for VP this cycle, ONLY IF the Democrats were broke and needed a Thiel-like figure to prop up the campaign.
#TeamKelly for me as well!
https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/former-illinois-gov-rod-blagojevich-shows-support-for-trump-after-guilty-verdict/3451028/
Prison changes people in odd ways.
Blago has always been an opportunist and just realized that there's more opportunity for him in the #MAGA world than there is elsewhere.
“Harris Kelly” is a middle of the road pick. It would do but just blah.
Middle of the road seems like a decent idea to me.
Harris brings enough excitement for the Dem base: the VP doesn't need to be exciting, but to be a "DEI pick" to soothe the independents and moderates.
If you simply go by what ticket sounds better to say, “Harris Cooper” wins by a long shot. Although it could be confused with a North Carolina supermarket chain. It sounds like a white shoe law firm and simply rolls off the tongue.
“Harris Shapiro” is a clanging gong.
“Harris Beshear” sounds like a person’s name and too ethnic.
What the 25th Amendment says about an incapacitated president.
https://theweek.com/politics/what-happens-if-a-us-president-becomes-incapacitated
"Section four outlines how the president may be removed from office if the vice-president and a "majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress" agree that he or she is unable to perform their duties. If approved, the vice-president becomes acting president. The president can resume office by declaring "no inability exists", but this can be challenged by the vice-president and the executive or congressional majority."
It is obvious that Biden's VP and administrative staff took advantage of Biden's senility to seize power for themselves even though he was unable to face prosecution for deliberately mishandling and sharing classified documents . Some of you say this is sorta OK because you sorta like the results regardless of it being unconstitutional and against the wishes of about 47% of the voters.
Joe Biden's puppet masters have ignored the law regarding detention of aliens and even ignored the Supreme Court's rulings regarding student loan forgiveness.
You focus on what MIGHT have happened (but did not) if Trump had similarly ignored lawful authority. What court rulings and constitutional provisions did Trump actually ignore - not ones he appealed.
Regarding Shapiro: I don't think his being Jewish is an issue (considering Kamala is married to a Jew).
The important negatives to his selection are his thin resumé and his support for school vouchers. His selection would solely be a benefit for the PA turnout, which - while important - is likely not enough to put him over the top compared to Kelly (who would bring AZ benefits, as well as benefits in other states due to his stance on immigration and guns).
"There is a strong sense by many -- especially Barack Hussein Obama -- that Kamala is a Marxist fraud."
Lmfao. Of course this is the Trump campaign's communications director.
Another negative for the Cooper pick: he's term-limited and Mark Robinson, the GOP candidate for the seat, is the current Lt Governor. If Cooper steps down, then Robinson becomes governor - at least for a little while.
One of the most interesting comments i read this morning regarding the Harris VP pick was the impact it had on the news cycle. In fact, Joe dropping out was a Godsend (in many ways), but it took the narrative away from trump. A tactic he has relied on since 2015.
Now with the excitement off Joe stepping aside, the VP question is consuming the airways. For my money, i would drag this out as close the convention as possible. Speculation makes for great copy, as seen above. Having fun with it makes it even more real, more entertaining. And, seeing Harris smile is refreshing, compared to the glaring and angry profile we see from trump/vance/et al.
Best part though was the remark by a trump staffer who said the worst outcome was they now needed to buy ads (32 million dollars worth) rather than relying on free promotion based on trump being so outlandish. Turning the tables is an interesting story on it's own.
Finally, after Merrie's excellent column yesterday i had a true epiphany moment. "Damn," in the immortal words of wrestler Ron Simmons. I think this may even sway our friend Cameron; my choice is now solidly locked in on Harris. Here's why; with vance hating cat (ladies) and trump hating dogs (lots of stories out there supporting that belief), why would anyone vote for candidates who hates the animals we so much love and cherish?
Just saying eh.
Mind blown.
Tim Walz is younger than Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise.
the polls will show a healthy support of kamala....that will be just one of many hooks for a "win".
David Thornton voting for Harris "to keep Trump out if office." Not a very good reason to vote for someone, but I'll just say this, be careful what you wish for.
It is in fact the primary reason for anyone to vote for Harris. If one believes that Trump is not only disqualified for office, but dangerous, then there is no other reasonable choice. There'd have to be a compelling reason NOT to vote for Harris, if one believes the premise.
On the other hand, if you don't believe the premise on Trump, there is no reason to vote for anyone other than who you like better for whatever variety of reasons.
How about voting for Harris because you believe in her? How about because you share her views on issues? How about because you share her religious and moral values ( or lack thereof)? There are a myriad of reasons to vote for her if you are convinced she could be a better candidate than the other one, than just to keep the other candidate out of office.
I'm voting for Harris, because I believe in her to keep Trump out of office. We share the view that DJT should be nowhere near the levers of power again, and we share moral values such as believing that it's wrong to mock disabled people.
There's no better candidate running now that I believe in on those fronts MORE than Kamala Harris right now. (I did believe Nikki Haley could be that person in the primaries, but we see how that went.)
:-)
Quoting Trump from today: "You have to get out and vote. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four years, it will be fixed, it will be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore.. In four years, you won’t have to vote again."
By those standards, I don’t agree with either candidate.
By those standards Harris is not a strong candidate.
What would you like folks that see Trump as an unqualified candidate to do?
Not vote for either one.
That may happen
If 2020 is any guide, that will be true: even with relatively high turnout, there was still more eligible voters that did not vote than voted for either Biden or Trump.
In a perfect world, this would be the case.
We do not live in a perfect world, and sometimes one must compromise and accept a less-than-ideal result to prevent a catastrophic one. This is something that has bedeviled the Democratic Party: getting the more Progressive/left voters to accept an incremental improvements on an issue they state they prioritize (e.g. climate) in order to continue to make progress on said issue.
Instead, you'll see those voters state that incremental improvements aren't good enough - it must be all or nothing. And then it ends up being not only nothing, but a step back - because *things can always get worse*.
So, for those who are conservatives and not Republicans ('cause Republican =/= conservative) their calculations may be that the most conservative option at this time is the Democratic Party's candidate - 'cause the alternative is worse.
MAGA maybe should have taken the advice about carefully wishing.
Biden is out but my prediction about any replacement being more progressive came true. Still, the axiom about surviving a bad policy candidate over one who will mount a frontal assault on the Constitution holds.
I think Congress would be more successful at blocking a Harris agenda than at keeping Trump leashed.
Harris is the one who will mount a frontal assault on the Constitution. I give you her stance on the 2nd amendment.
Tenses are doing a lot of heavy lifting here. “Kamala will”. But Trump did—or he did not. We have a lot of data upon which to base our decision on Trump. We only have opinions for Kamala because she’s literally done almost nothing, which is what is expected of a VP.
People said the same thing about Biden and guns. He hasn’t done anything on that score. I doubt Harris would either because of the filibuster and Supreme Court.
OTOH Trump tried to convince the country that vice presidents can overrule voters and Electoral College and claims absolute power.
"Take the guns first, go through due process second."
- Donald J. Trump
Video: https://www.politico.com/video/2018/02/28/trump-take-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second-065189