This would not be a bad deal for Romney. As vice-president to a man of 72 years, he would certainly be in a position to exert influence and eventually succeed to the throne, if not by death, then in 4 or 8 years. The good news is that by that time we could have some sense as to how sincere Romney’s new-found social conservatism really is.
This would not be a bad deal for McCain and the Republicans. Tickets are supposed to be about balance (think: Kennedy/Johnson) and Romney would bring the hard-core conservatives in, plus add the administrative experience angle that’s missing in this congress of senators. Plus, he can counter the Democrats talking about health care, where McCain counters them on immigration.
Put the VP list candidates on “Deal or no Deal” but instead of money amounts, have cabinet positions in the brief cases, with one having “Vice President”. Every so often McCain will call down and offer a lesser post. sure, it could work. And it would make as much sense as the present system.
But didn’t the Constitution provide for the loosing candidate to be the VP and the winning to be the President? When did that change? Can’t think tonight. Will research it tomorrow.
It was changed after the 1796 election, when you got arch-rivals Adams & Jefferson as Preseident & VP. They demonstrated pretty clearly that such a system was unworkable, and so it was changed unofficialy before the election of 1800, though the new variant (having VP candidates, with the understanding that Electors (having two votes) would cast one vote less for the VP candidate, thus giving him 2nd place) nearly led to disaster when Aaron Burr (Jefferson’s VP) tried to get himself made President with Jeffersona s VP. So in 1804 an amendment was passed giving the current system.
Though I like the Deal or No Deal Variant. “Do you want to accept Postmaster General, or do you want to keep playing?”
No. 4 – My reaction exactly. Those political naifs who think that cooperation with the other party tarnishes ideological purity do not understand that the busines of the country would come to a halt if they had their way. But then knowledge of history is not very current among so many people. Maybe they really don’t believe in a two-party system.
Ouch!
Yeah, because throwing his support to Huckabee would have really made a difference.
What has Romney been offered? To just up and quit and then endorse the man you’ve been battling with. Call me cynical, but some sort of deal was made.
Some sort of deal was made? You mean politics occurred? You don’t mean it!
This would not be a bad deal for Romney. As vice-president to a man of 72 years, he would certainly be in a position to exert influence and eventually succeed to the throne, if not by death, then in 4 or 8 years. The good news is that by that time we could have some sense as to how sincere Romney’s new-found social conservatism really is.
This would not be a bad deal for McCain and the Republicans. Tickets are supposed to be about balance (think: Kennedy/Johnson) and Romney would bring the hard-core conservatives in, plus add the administrative experience angle that’s missing in this congress of senators. Plus, he can counter the Democrats talking about health care, where McCain counters them on immigration.
Put the VP list candidates on “Deal or no Deal” but instead of money amounts, have cabinet positions in the brief cases, with one having “Vice President”. Every so often McCain will call down and offer a lesser post. sure, it could work. And it would make as much sense as the present system.
But didn’t the Constitution provide for the loosing candidate to be the VP and the winning to be the President? When did that change? Can’t think tonight. Will research it tomorrow.
It was changed after the 1796 election, when you got arch-rivals Adams & Jefferson as Preseident & VP. They demonstrated pretty clearly that such a system was unworkable, and so it was changed unofficialy before the election of 1800, though the new variant (having VP candidates, with the understanding that Electors (having two votes) would cast one vote less for the VP candidate, thus giving him 2nd place) nearly led to disaster when Aaron Burr (Jefferson’s VP) tried to get himself made President with Jeffersona s VP. So in 1804 an amendment was passed giving the current system.
Though I like the Deal or No Deal Variant. “Do you want to accept Postmaster General, or do you want to keep playing?”
No. 4 – My reaction exactly. Those political naifs who think that cooperation with the other party tarnishes ideological purity do not understand that the busines of the country would come to a halt if they had their way. But then knowledge of history is not very current among so many people. Maybe they really don’t believe in a two-party system.