FWIS3

I realize that right now everyone is focused on who the nominee for president will be from both parties. But, sometime this summer both parties will (probably) be doing what is called a brokered convention. Some backroom knife fights and a little bargaining will occur. Somehow, I don't think Hillary is going to settle for Secretary of State this time.

Which leads me to wonder. In the case of the democrats you can almost predict this ticket: Clinton and Sanders. That's right folks you heard it here first. I am guessing (really it's a guess) that when the Democratic Convention ends this year we will be told that our nominee for president will be Hillary and the Vice President nominee will be Bernie. IMO this is how the democrats figure they can steal the populist thunder from the Donald. AND capture the whole enchilada by appealing to just about everyone who might think about voting Democrat.

The Republican'ts are a little harder to figure out. NO ONE in the mainstream GOP wants Trump. I think they would rather sell their daughters to a sheik in Bobbagistan. There is a rumor that they may try to resurrect Romney. Rubio probably won't even win his home state of Florida. Kasich is toast. So, that leaves the GOP with Cruz and maybe Romney. My worst guess is that if they do trot Romney out it will be as the Presidential Nominee. If they do that it will be a Romney/Cruz ticket if I am reading the Tea Leaves right.

Care to voice an opinion?

As I said on FB, I highly doubt that Romney would be anyone's choice on the Republican side. You don't go for a guy in a race who already decisively lost that race just four years ago. IMO they're much more likely to beg Paul Ryan (seems to be a trend this year after all) or grab someone else who was in this primary cycle but didn't do as well.

I also think it's too early to say the Democrats are heading for a brokered convention, because they have so many more superdelegates. Keep in mind, even eight years ago with Obama v Hillary that was never seriously going to happen- it was just a long slog- and much as the Bernie camp won't admit it, things were a bit more neck and neck then.

With all that said, I wouldn't completely go against the idea of Hillary bringing Bernie on board as her VP. It would certainly solve a lot of her problems while keeping in check all the "OMG socialist" stuff that is easier to sling at a presidential candidate, and while some would argue Bernie wouldn't want to give up a Senate position I would argue he's more a great advocate than great legislative draftsman or anything like that, and being VP is an even better position for that.

I mentioned a Clinton-Sanders ticket to Mrs. T several months ago. But SciFi is right, no one heard it here.
Man I wish Ryan and Romney would just please go away.

Yeah, to be fair, they had a really hard time getting him to be House leader so I doubt they have the stomach for finding someone else for that thankless job.

Bill the Cat and Opus!

I'd vote for a Clinton/Sanders ticket by default, but I'm betting it won't happen... Who knows though.

In any case, the whole thing kind of depends on who we get in the Senate IMO. If we get President Sanders and a Republican-dominated Senate, it'll be 4-8 more years of stuff not getting done while the country crumbles around us.

Hell, that might even happen with more conservative Democrats in control. Have you guys seen some of the stuff that e.g. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has supported? Or Chuck Schumer? Ugh.

As for Romney and Cruz: people who dismiss 50% of the US population as parasites, or casually talk about preemptive nuclear attacks, are not fit for the Presidency.

I have no idea. I thought I knew very little about the American electorate before this election, and now I realize I know even less. I wonder if I am the same species, this stuff has become so incomprehensible to me.

And, I don't much care.

I'll cast my votes in the primary and the general election, and I probably will have little difficulty in making my choices, but I won't give any of them my time or money, nor do I much care any more.

I'm not even sure I care that much if Trump wins the general election. I know it will be horrible, but what I think about it doesn't matter, and we survived Bush/Chenney, we'll probably survive this too.

I'm much, much more interested in the baseball season.

Well, I'm pretty sure Ben Carson has the biggest dick but the biggest dick himself would be a harder call. Find out what our candidates think in the next GOP debate.

To be totally honest I have no clue what the GOP is going to do. I know that right now it's coming down to Chump or Crud as far as the primaries are concerned. The challenge is that the establishment GOP absolutely hates the idea of having Chump or Crud win the nomination. I think they honestly thought JB was their man and that people would vote for him. I think everyone is seriously underestimating the fact that people are not just ANGRY. They are FED UP and they want real substantial change and they want it NOW. The Mad Hatter Tea Party tapped into that in 2010. And it has not gone away.

They wanted to know where the occupy wall street movement went.
Well, welcome to it.
Let's see what happens if you deny it again by forcing in the establishment candidates.
Just pull that bow string tighter boys. Pull.

I'll repeat my FB opinions.

I doubt Sen. Sanders would be interested in VP. That's just not his thing. I think he'd much rather stay in the Senate. The VP doesn't do anything in this country and has little influence on the public debate. Cheney, who was effectively president, being a recent exception but that was because W was such a lightweight.

Brokered conventions are a thing of the past. It could happen, but the American people don't believe in that anymore. They believe in votes and get pretty damned upset when someone tries to nullify their vote. And on the rabid GOP side, those folks are well armed and have shown no reluctance to brandish weapons. Can you imagine what the Trump supporters would do if the GOP 'establishment' took away his nomination?

As to what swift said, yeah I agree pretty much but what Bush/Cheney did to this country - particularly the economic meltdown - had severe and lasting effects on a lot of people. Sure, we survived as a country but many are still hurting.

Parrothead wrote:Bill the Cat and Opus!

Makes more sense than Trump/Cruz or Trump/Rubio.

geonuc wrote:

Parrothead wrote:Bill the Cat and Opus!

Makes more sense than Trump/Cruz or Trump/Rubio.

Indeed it does

geonuc wrote:Brokered conventions are a thing of the past. It could happen, but the American people don't believe in that anymore. They believe in votes and get pretty damned upset when someone tries to nullify their vote. And on the rabid GOP side, those folks are well armed and have shown no reluctance to brandish weapons. Can you imagine what the Trump supporters would do if the GOP 'establishment' took away his nomination?

I don't know if the GOP leaders are stupid enough to go with a brokered convention, particularly if it picks anyone other than the person with the highest percentage (even if not a majority). If Trump goes in with 40 to 50% of the delegates, I would expect him to get the nomination, but I also can see the leadership trying to pick someone else.

If they did that, if Trump gets 40% and they push through some establishment Republican, I expect Trump and his followers to flee the GOP and run as an independent, pinkie promise or not.

I'm sticking with the Sanders-Obama ticket.

I know Barack isn't eligible, but Michelle is. And for campaign slogan, we're going to co-opt "To hell with Michelle". They will be stunned.

By the time the election is over, and the inauguration approaches, she may well be the president.

grapes wrote:I'm sticking with the Sanders-Obama ticket.

I know Barack isn't eligible, ...

You sure? There's some uncertainty. The 22nd Amendment says no person shall be elected to the office of president more than twice. Doesn't say squat about the vice-president assuming the office. The 12th Amendment has vague language about the vice-president not being 'constitutionally ineligible' but many believe that only restricts age and citizenship, particularly since the 22nd wasn't created at the time and a president could be re-lected any number of times.

I've been thinking about this and my hunch is that if Trump cinches the 'Pub nomination, Sanders might consider joining the ticket with Clinton (as VP) if Cruz is actually nominated probably not.

geonuc wrote:

grapes wrote:I'm sticking with the Sanders-Obama ticket.

I know Barack isn't eligible, ...

You sure? There's some uncertainty. The 22nd Amendment says no person shall be elected to the office of president more than twice. Doesn't say squat about the vice-president assuming the office. The 12th Amendment has vague language about the vice-president not being 'constitutionally ineligible' but many believe that only restricts age and citizenship, particularly since the 22nd wasn't created at the time and a president could be re-lected any number of times.

The wording in the 12th (actually, the last sentence of the 12th) is "But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States." What's vague about that? And the 22nd is part of the constitution.

But I grant you, there are those ready to make the argument. Many more would counter the argument. Cheney had to move back to Wyoming to appoint himself to the Vice President candidacy, I don't think a former president could change their spots that easily.

So pretty obvious after last night unless you're in serious denial that it's going to be a Trump vs Clinton general election. A bit of arguing about if Trump will get the majority of delegates, but definitely his to lose.

So with that I'm still thinking a bit about Bernie's path ahead- he definitely has enough money and delegates to hang out as long as he wants. I wonder in part what the odds are of getting some of the amazing enthusiasm and energy of his followers into other elections for stuff like Congress and local legislatures. It could happen, especially if Bernie threw some weight behind such a movement, but getting into those elections is far less sexy than a presidential campaign so not sure if it would happen.

Either way, I think this horse race is done and Obama is announcing his Supreme Court justice nomination in a few hours, so we can take a breather for a few weeks to discuss that instead.

Rommie wrote:So pretty obvious after last night unless you're in serious denial that it's going to be a Trump vs Clinton general election. A bit of arguing about if Trump will get the majority of delegates, but definitely his to lose.

I generally agree. It is possible that Trump enters the convention with the biggest block of delegates, but not a majority (50%+). Even in that case, he may very likely still be the nominee.

But if he enters with the biggest block, but not a majority, and if the Republican establishment tries to push through anyone else other than Trump, and they succeed and make someone else the nominee (yes, there are deliberately a lot of ifs there), things could get interesting. In that case, I would expect Trump to say that since they "stole" the nomination from him, that he is not obligated to his pledge to support the Republican nominee, and he runs as an independent. I also think that would hand the election to Hillary.

So with that I'm still thinking a bit about Bernie's path ahead- he definitely has enough money and delegates to hang out as long as he wants. I wonder in part what the odds are of getting some of the amazing enthusiasm and energy of his followers into other elections for stuff like Congress and local legislatures. It could happen, especially if Bernie threw some weight behind such a movement, but getting into those elections is far less sexy than a presidential campaign so not sure if it would happen.

I'd love to see that happen, but I'd be very pleasantly surprised. I think the Republicans have pretty much gerrymandered themselves into a hold on the House, and I don't see young people and energetic Bernie followers going wild on Senate races.

Swift wrote:

Rommie wrote:So pretty obvious after last night unless you're in serious denial that it's going to be a Trump vs Clinton general election. A bit of arguing about if Trump will get the majority of delegates, but definitely his to lose.

I generally agree. It is possible that Trump enters the convention with the biggest block of delegates, but not a majority (50%+). Even in that case, he may very likely still be the nominee.

But if he enters with the biggest block, but not a majority, and if the Republican establishment tries to push through anyone else other than Trump, and they succeed and make someone else the nominee (yes, there are deliberately a lot of ifs there), things could get interesting. In that case, I would expect Trump to say that since they "stole" the nomination from him, that he is not obligated to his pledge to support the Republican nominee, and he runs as an independent. I also think that would hand the election to Hillary.

It could be decided in the House of Representatives.

Apparently for Trump to completely lock up the nomination he has to win 91% of the remaining delegates from the states whose primaries are still pending. If he doesn't do that there is much speculation that the GOP will force him out as the nominee. It's pretty bad when Rubio was telling people in Ohio to vote for Kasich. And now that Rubio is out of the running it will be interesting to see who people will be voting for. I suspect Kasich will pick up some steam.