"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
Posted on 09/13/2004 12:27:52 PM PDT by ken5050
You vote for an elector in November. As a convenience, the ballot is marked with the candidates' names, but that is only a convenience.
While there are differences in the state laws, the simple essence is that each major political party may instruct its electors who to vote for. The first selction is done via primary election, but if that candidate becomes unavailable, the party is still on the ballot.
Electors do not cast their ballots for president and vice president until December.
I have said for many months, unsettling elections are on the horizon, and this one is shaping up to be an(other) unsettling one.
I think Republicans are paranoid about Hillary.
She is not the bogeyman.
I'm not afraid of her in 2008, I'm even less afraid of her in 2004.
If she wants to jump into the ring, to quote John Kerry, "Bring it on".
the Ovarian Candidate...scary stuff.
Ralph might suspend his campaign, but he'd never endorse anyone. Say what you will about his politics, which are indeed whacky, but I think he genuinely hates both parties.
I think it's legally too late for anyone to come in and save the Dims from themselves. The Hildebeast will be happy to wait until '08. Lurch is a blip on the radar screen for her. For her to make such a move at this late date would create a civil war within the party and send them the way of the Whigs.
"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
I agree with you.
Hillary could not go out and spend any amount of money she wanted. She would be under the federal guidelines and with all the ad buys, I would assume that most of the Kerry money has been obligated. Not to mention you have John Edwards who ran for President and he would not just step aside for Hillary.
I certainly haven't donated the maximum limite to RNC but if she ran, you can bet they would get a hefty check and 527's would spring up so fast Hillary's head would spin.
You might get something through like in NJ but you are dealing with states all over the Country and it is already past the deadline to be on the ballot. Not to mention Kerry is too arrogant to move aside.
This is not plausible and people are running too scared of Hillary Clinton IMHO. What is a $100 million war chest that you cannot spend or give away in the general election worth -- zero, zip, nada. Campaign ads are bought and this is not going to happen IMHO.
Click here to check out my web site dedicated to exposing Hillary.
in order for hillary to run in 1004 kerry has to drop out. short of assasination (in which Edwards becomes thae candidate) there is no way he'd do that. fantisizing about her taking over the nod simply shows that someone has been reading too many cheap political thrillers.
as to her position in 2008? The dems think she's a saint. it doesn't matter what the reality is - the dems think she can walk on water. that's all it takes. I mean who do we have that can combat her - especially with the press on her side?
Just hang on to your hat. Everything ken described fits easily in the law, and more unsettling things have happened. Gerald Ford became President before he was ever on a ballot, because the VP (Agnew) and President (Nixon) resigned under scandal.
Ralph might suspend his campaign, but he'd never endorse anyone. Say what you will about his politics, which are indeed whacky, but I think he genuinely hates both parties.
I think it's legally too late for anyone to come in and save the Dims from themselves. The Hildebeast will be happy to wait until '08. Lurch is a blip on the radar screen for her. For her to make such a move at this late date would create a civil war within the party and send them the way of the Whigs.
Memogate? If Kerry fed forged documents to CBS, you think his campaign would survive?
Disagree. The Clinton's are to subtle and risk adversive to attempt to overturn the results of the primaries and convention.
The Clinton's have assumed control of Kerry campaign. Instead of getting better things are getting decidedly worse for Kerry. She will stand on the sidelines as Kerry's campaign is destroyed from within.
In 2008 Hillary will be the automatic front runner because of the disastrous numbers of Kerry and Edwards but she will still have to enter primaries. What happens in the intervening WOT years will determine if Hillary's 2008 Democrat presidential candidate nomination is of any value.
Ken's point was that this does not get it over with. There is no downside. IF she loses, so what? It's not a reflection on her.
I agree. But my kidney stands at the ready...just in case.
Please, folks, get this 'Torricelli' option out of your heads.
It isn't going to happen. For example, Friday Nebraska certified its ballot. Many other states have done the same. Every state has different election laws - they don't have New Jersey's screwy ones.
Kerry is now locked into place by accepting the nomination at the Dems convention.
The big bad Hillary isn't going to come up from the depths suddenly. In fact, I expect her crew is behind the forged documents used by CBS, in order to get Kerry caught up and discredited in the scandal it is now heading towards.
Hillary wants Kerry to lose, but I agree that she won't be running for reelection in 2006 for the Senate. She will opt out, saying she wants to not only represent the people of New York, but all of America against the evil Republicans who control the House, Senate, and White House.
And if you think the Dems would even dare put anyone but fringe candidates against Hillary in the primary, you are mistaken. Sharpton and Kucinich will be used to show how 'moderate' Hillary is. You won't be seeing Dean, Gephardt, Edwards (you will see him as the successor to Hillary), Lieberman, or Kerry in 2008. Hillary will then select Barak Obama as her running mate, thus solidifying the black vote and womens vote - the two constituencies needed to win in 2008.
The law intends to "comprehend" or deal with the unexpected, but possible. People get sick, become ill, etc. The fortunes of a political party will not depend on any single individual.
Maybe the Clintons "Fostercide" Kerry?
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.