Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cokie Roberts: Dems ‘Nervously Beginning to Whisper’ About Hillary Replacement; Floats Biden...
Breitbart.com ^ | 12 Sep 2016 | Jeff Poor

Posted on 09/12/2016 6:59:14 AM PDT by Rockitz

Monday on NPR’s “Morning Edition,” ABC political commentator Cokie Roberts offered her thoughts on the apparent health issues regarding Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and the how the party could be looking to handle things if a replacement is needed for Clinton.

According to Roberts, there was already conversation within the party about such a possibility.

“The fact that it comes now when the polls are tightening and Democrats are already saying that Hillary was the only candidate who could not beat Trump and it is taking her off of the campaign trail, canceling her trip to California – it has them very nervously beginning to whisper about having her step aside and finding another candidate.”

When asked if that really could happen, Roberts called it “unlikely to be a real thing,” but floated the name of Vice President Joe Biden as a possible replacement.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2016elections; hillaryreplacement; hillaryshealth; hillarysreplacement; worrieddems
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-229 next last
To: Rockitz
...."how the party could be looking to handle things if a replacement is needed for Clinton"....

They have no choice.....Hillary is the only one who can determine if she stays or leaves....they really don't have to let Sanders run since he went back to being Independent....to imagine Biden......??? ....and they think Trumps a danger?


181 posted on 09/12/2016 10:11:18 AM PDT by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: silentknight
Obama could declare a national emergency. What does the Constitution say about this subject?

The closest to what you're describing is the Suspension Clause (Article I, Section 9, Clause 2) of the Constitution. It allows for the suspension of Habeus Corpus during a rebellion or invasion. The Supreme Court ruled during the Civil War that this power belongs to Congress, not the President. I expect a Republican Congress would be very reluctant to give the Liberal Messiah the power take American citizens prisoner without due process.

182 posted on 09/12/2016 10:22:39 AM PDT by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf
the 25th amendment applies only after she is elected

The 25th Amendment would apply once she took office. Between being elected and taking office Section 3 of the 20th Amendment, which deals with situation involving the President-elect.

183 posted on 09/12/2016 10:29:27 AM PDT by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz

Anybody heard from Sarah Silverman? I believe it was just this past Friday the not-too-funny comedienne cum M.D. opined that anyone questioning Hillary!’s health (”She’s fine!) was an “A$$H***”


184 posted on 09/12/2016 10:32:22 AM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2; silverleaf; Helicondelta; silentknight; sphinx; Ditter; Little Ray; Pollard; ...

Sanders, Biden, and Kaine are all losers. The DNC has one last faint hope: Obama - a long shot but might be their best shot regardless of the Constitution which they ignore anyway. Obama has gotten away with a lot of unforeseen violations of the Constitution these last seven years and he and the Left are used to passivity of the Right.

It would be a long shot, but the DNC is desperate and Obama may seem like their only winning shot. Bernie, Biden, or Kaine would be sure losers. They might see Obama as their only real chance right now. And seven years of inaction by the states and the people of the states in the face of repeated and egregious violations of the Constitution have emboldened Obama and the Left to possibly try something like this.

As with other violations, they may try using the “dead letter” defense. Or Obama may try using martial law in some kind of invented “emergency”. Who knows? As long as they go unchallenged, the whole Constitution is up for grabs as far as the Left is concerned.

I actually hope they try it. I’d love to see Trump vs. Obama. I’d love to see someone (Trump) finally take that arrogant, criminal dictator down.


185 posted on 09/12/2016 10:32:27 AM PDT by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: randita
....."They can’t make her go. She would have to do it willingly and she won’t"......

I tend to agree...her ego won't let her leave and she's afraid of the potential for prison if she doesn't stay the course.........as she evidenced the great lengths 'she herself' is more than willing to go as she did yesterday ...she is not going to lay down the Presidency or let anyone force her to....

...."They strut their evil before you"......


186 posted on 09/12/2016 10:37:49 AM PDT by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz

If ‘Kooky’ Roberts is mentioning discussions within the DNC of an alternate candidate......IT’’S TRUE

THE EVIL WITCH IS DEAD......even if she survives physically, another Clintonist Administration will not be happening....

We DEPLORABLES, who saw FEMA CAMPS in our future, can breathe a sigh of relief.....


187 posted on 09/12/2016 10:42:27 AM PDT by Trump_vs_Evil_Witch (Huma Abedin + Hillary Clinton => Muslim Brotherhood asset, lesbian spy ring)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: randita

True, Jezebel will not leave the stage graciously, ...... Such decisions take time...... She has the name recognition...... Oh, what to do.....? Can you imagine the hand ringing among the globalists?

Maybe an emergency Bilderberg meeting....?


188 posted on 09/12/2016 10:53:56 AM PDT by Trump_vs_Evil_Witch (Huma Abedin + Hillary Clinton => Muslim Brotherhood asset, lesbian spy ring)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Jim 0216

No way.
O will vacate on 1/20, else be evicted 1/21.
A whole lotta people will see to it.


189 posted on 09/12/2016 11:08:15 AM PDT by ctdonath2 ("If anyone will not listen to your words, shake the dust from your feet and leave them." - Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz

Not all problems have solutions and sometimes the best thing you can do is nothing and let the disaster play out. Luckily, I don’t think the dems have the wisdom to see or accept this, but if they do nothing and let Hillary go down fighting and Trump wins the Presidency they will have 4 years to prep and bring out their new, formidable champion of globalist socialism and then we are back on the fast track to tyranny again.


190 posted on 09/12/2016 11:19:29 AM PDT by Garth Tater (What's mine is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
I think that if we review the video and emphasize its true implications to everyone far and wide, Hillary and her lying shills in the MSM are finished.

She didn't merely "stumble" it was a complete collapse -- the aides did not merely help her balance or return to her own standing position, they dragged and shoved her into the van like a sack of potatoes.

What was incredibly revealing was that they did not pause even for a moment to help her onto her feet, to communicate with her or each other about what to do.... both aides (on each side of her) "knew" that they had to lift/shove/drag her into that van just as fast as possible. That is an incredible fact, if we reflect upon what it means for her condition and for what the aides around her are trying to do.

Any normal person would have been helped to stand and stabilize in place. Instead, their mission was to manhandle her into that van just as fast as possible, by any means necessary. Astonishing.

191 posted on 09/12/2016 11:20:02 AM PDT by Enchante (Hillary's new campaign slogan: "Guilty as hell, free as a bird!! Laws are for peasants!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz

“Maybe you haven’t heard, but pneumonia can kill you.”

This is HRC we’re talking about here. She’ll have the pneumonia murdered in the middle of the night and then say it was a suicide.


192 posted on 09/12/2016 11:25:58 AM PDT by MeganC (JE SUIS CHARLES MARTEL!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Helicondelta

How does he get on the ballot in the GOP controlled States?

Deadlines for parties to certify their candidates for the general election

If a nominee dropped out of the race and was replaced by his or her party, what kind of ballot access obstacles might they face?

States require political parties to submit names of presidential candidates in order to certify them for the general election ballot. Every state has some sort of official or unofficial deadline for this (see the table below). Some states have earlier deadlines than others because of early voting and voting by mail and absentee voting. As of February 2016, 34 states offered early voting in some form or another, and several states allow voting as early as late September.[6] Three states (Colorado, Oregon and Washington) use all-mail voting systems, thereby eliminating the need for early voting.

August/early September
The bulk of the dates for certifying the names of major party presidential candidates are in August and September. Mid August was the point at which either party could have found a replacement nominee and still have been able to get his or her name on the ballot in enough states to be competitive in November without having to navigate the courts and ballot access issues. For example, if a nominee had dropped out in late August, his or her name would already have been certified to appear as their party’s candidate for president in about 20 states. If he or she dropped out in late September, that number rises to almost 40 states.

Late September
Replacing a candidate’s name in late September could prove challenging. The parties would likely have to look to the courts. As Politico noted on August 4, 2016, the courts have shown a willingness to work with the parties on the issue of deadlines: “Courts have tended to discard ballot deadlines in favor of having two parties represented on the ballot.”[7] In 2002, for instance, the New Jersey Supreme Court allowed Democrats to replace their nominee for a U.S. Senate seat 15 days after the certification deadline.[8] In addition to this, election officials in the states have been known to show some leeway on the deadlines. Richard Winger, an expert on ballot access laws, told Ballotpedia by email, “even when major parties have missed deadlines for certifying presidential and vice-presidential nominees, or presidential elector candidates, election officials have always set the deadline aside.”[9]

The other factor to consider, however, is whether or not the opposing party would file lawsuits seeking to enforce state laws as they are written and prevent a replacement nominee from appearing on the ballot. This would consume a considerable amount time, energy, and resource for both parties but would likely exacerbate the struggles of the party trying to get its replacement nominee on the ballot.

October/early November
In October, especially later in the month, and in early November (before November 8) the situation becomes significantly more complicated. At this point, nearly all ballot certification deadlines have passed, many ballots have been printed off, and voters in some states will have already cast their ballots. This begs the question: what happens if a candidate has dropped out of the race but wins the popular vote in a state? Would the replacement nominee just receive those electoral votes? The answer lies in what that state has to say about its electors in the electoral college. The Constitution does dictate how electors must cast their votes. But some states do. More than half the states have laws dictating how electors must vote. If the former nominee won in a state that does not have a law on how its electors vote, then, theoretically, they could win all of that state’s electoral votes. But if the former nominee won in a state that does have a law on how its electors vote, then, one would have to look at that law’s fine print to see what would happen and if the state’s electoral votes could go to the replacement nominee.

https://ballotpedia.org/Important_dates_in_the_2016_presidential_race


193 posted on 09/12/2016 11:27:50 AM PDT by Rome2000 (SMASH THE CPUSA-SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS-CLOSE ALL MOSQUES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan

Joe’s a brutally effective politician, even with his gaffes.

i dont care if it was just ryan or not, he is a brutal debater too.

i dont him to “bring it on”.

i want the sure loser.


194 posted on 09/12/2016 11:29:42 AM PDT by dp0622 (The only thing an upper crust conservative hates more than a liberal is a middle class conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz

Look at all the problems this crazy ol’ bat is causing and she isn’t even in office! If she cared anything about this nation, she would have NEVER run!


195 posted on 09/12/2016 11:31:44 AM PDT by AuntB (Trump is our Ben Franklin - Brilliant, Boisterous, Brave and ALL AMERICAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pride in the USA
Roberts called it “unlikely to be a real thing,”

I agree, so why is she talking about these "whispers"?

196 posted on 09/12/2016 11:33:22 AM PDT by lonevoice (Life is short. Make fun of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Helicondelta; Publius

See Fai Mao’s #85. Excellent


197 posted on 09/12/2016 11:41:14 AM PDT by LS ("Castles Made of Sand, Fall in the Sea . . . Eventually" (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: acoulterfan

I would have preferred Biden to be president all this time for that matter. If we could have impeached Osamabama and put in Bite-me, well it wouldn’t have been good, but it wouldn’t have been this bad.

And I hope I don’t get in trouble for saying this, but it’s because he’s white. The rinos would have stood up to him occasionally as a white but they would NEVER say no to a black man. Frickin’ race royalty. This is beyond ridiculous.


198 posted on 09/12/2016 12:02:55 PM PDT by ichabod1 (Make America Normal Again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Menehune56

“Grand Mal” baby, that means “Big Bad.” Literally.


199 posted on 09/12/2016 12:05:50 PM PDT by ichabod1 (Make America Normal Again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

And yet ‘illary always has her muzlum handler close by her side. creepy.


200 posted on 09/12/2016 12:12:41 PM PDT by ichabod1 (Make America Normal Again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-229 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson