Posted on 07/24/2019 3:22:18 PM PDT by EdnaMode
Netflix has vetoed Designated Survivor‘s hope for a fourth season, cancelling the ABC cast-off after a 10-episode try-out on the streaming service.
“We are proud to have offered fans a third season of Designated Survivor, and will continue to carry all three seasons for years to come,” reads a statement from Netflix. “We’re especially thankful to star and executive producer Kiefer Sutherland, who brought passion, dedication and an unforgettable performance as President Kirkman. We’re also grateful to showrunner/executive producer Neal Bear for his guiding vision and steady hand, creator/executive producer David Guggenheim and EPs Mark Gordon, Suzan Bymel, Simon Kinberg, Aditya Sood and Peter Noah along with the cast and crew who crafted a compelling and satisfying final season.”
The Sutherland-led political drama was cancelled by ABC in May 2018, after its sophomore run (averaging 3.9 million total viewers and a 0.7 demo rating) dropped 30 and 40 percent from its freshman season. Then-ABC chief Channing Dungey explained at the time, “We were less confident with the creative path forward than the other shows we brought back.”
Designated Survivor underwent three backstage shake-ups during its first two seasons. Amy B. Harris (Wicked City) originally served as showrunner on the series (which was created by David Guggenheim), only to be replaced in May 2016 upon its official pickup, with Jon Harmon Feldman (Blood & Oil). Feldman left in December 2016, and was succeeded by Jeff Melvoin (Army Wives). And then The Good Wife grad Keith Eisner stepped in to run Season 2.
Four months after ABC gave the series the hook, Netflix stepped in to “save” Season 3, with ER vet Neal Baer at the helm. TVLine readers gave those 10 episodes an average grade of “B+,” though some took issue with the TV-MA themes, language and content.
True. But President Kennedy asked the National Security Council for the correct procedure for replacing the government in the event of a surprise Soviet nuclear strike that took out the District of Columbia. The NSC said that the only body with the authority to choose a new president would be the Electoral College chosen in the last presidential election.
Senate vacancies are filled by the state governors.
Except in those states, like Massachusetts, where the new senator must be chosen in a special election.
One troubling aspect to the 25th Amendment...
What if no one has a majority of the Electoral College, and the House is deadlocked?
The 12th Amendment requires a majority of House delegations to elect a President, and the Senate requires only a majority to elect a Vice President.
It would be easier to elect a Vice President in the Senate than a President in the House. A number of delegations would be tied.
The Vice President would become Acting President. Possibly he could try to name a Vice President under the 25th Amendment - it requires only a majority vote of both Houses to confirm a Vice President (Ford is the only one so confirmed) - this is a lower standard than what the 12th Amendment requires to elect a President.
After all that, suppose the House came to agreement...would the acting President be booted from office?
OK, now that was prior to the 25th Amendment...
Once DS grabbed a captive audience, it began the slide towards Leftism.
Yeah, F bombs pretty much ruin the script.
Likewise.
I think that was when we bailed. I thought that it was a midwest governor, but I could be wrong.
Designated Survivor, designated for assignment.
I’m not surprised it had 4 or so executive producers during the time I watched it, that kind of shiite is very evident in a production.
The third season sounds better if only because it was no longer bound under the constraints of network TV.
Nelson Rockefeller was also confirmed this way as Ford's Vice President.
The 12th Amendment requires a majority of House delegations to elect a President, and the Senate requires only a majority to elect a Vice President.
I'm not following.
The Electoral College elects both the President and Vice President. The Senate requires a majority to confirm a nominee to fill a vacancy, not to elect.
The 12th Amendment gives the House until March to decide. This is probably anachronistic today.
If the House cannot agree on a President, then it will likely also disagree on a Vice President, which the 12th Amendment calls on to be Acting President after March.
I would suppose at some point the Speaker would become Acting President? I don't think an Acting President has the power to nominate a Vice President.
-PJ
From Amendment XII:
..from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice.
....
from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice.
...
As I say, just one delegation tied by historical standards is low. States with say 4 representatives have frequently had 2R and 2D in their delegations for instance.
Do you agree it’s harder for the House to break an Electoral College deadlock (for the Presidency) than it is for the Senate to break an Electoral College deadlock (for the Vice Presidency)? No party having a majority of delegations is much more common than a tie in the Senate (and even then, the old VP can vote until his term expires on January 20).
Similarly, it would be easier for an Acting President to get a Vice President confirmed by a majority of both Houses (Amendment 25) than it would be for the House to break the electoral college deadlock. If one party controlled the majority of delegations and the other controlled the majority of seats (as we have now), it would be a very contentious process.
If that were to happen - I don’t know if the House could, at some point in the term - agree on a 12th amendment selection for President - what would happen.
I’m thinking that the vote would stand, and the 12th amendment President would become President, the Acting President would become Vice President (the post which the Senate actually elected him for), and then the 25th Amendment Vice President would be out the door.
I’m sure none of this was thought of when the 25th amendment was ratified....or maybe it was.
I did forget about Nelson Rockefeller, yes.
Now that I reread that, it says “House shall choose immediately.” Someone might say that the House can consider no other business (especially not a 25th amendment nomination) until that question is decided.
I do agree that it would be harder for the House to agree on a President than for the Senate to agree on a Vice President.
However, I don't think they would split the ticket. That said, if it were to happen in 2020 the Democrats would definitely try to split the administration and then move to impeach the Republican. The Republicans, not so much. They would give the opposition President his Vice President; they're just not wired to be ruthless.
Interestingly, the only election where this was a factor was the election of 1824, where only one party ran unopposed. Andrew Jackson beat John Quincy Adams but failed to reach an Electoral College majority. The House gave the election to Adams. John C. Calhoun was selected as the Vice President. All were from the same party, so Calhoun was effectively each candidate's running mate.
Jackson would win outright in 1828.
-PJ
12th Amendment
And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.Terms didn't start on January 20 back then, so the March 4 deadline is interesting. The 20th Amendment addresses this:
20th Amendment Clause 3
If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.This says that the Acting President is only temporary, but Congress can pass a law to fill the temporary vacancy. This is only temporary, as the 20th amendment is superior to any act of Congress, meaning that Congress cannot permanently select an Acting President.
-PJ
The 25th Amendment could have been written a whole lot better.
As I say, a deadlocked Senate is much less likely than a deadlocked House. Although it appears from Amendment XII that a majority of the whole are needed, so a 50-49 vote fails.
I can actually see the President Pro Tempore abstaining so he could get the acting Presidency (should the Speaker not want it).
The only baseball on tv has been Mets v. Pirates. All wkend.
Mets broadcasters incessant talk about being in wildcard race. Crazy.
Can imagine what the Pitt broadcast is like now
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.