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

To: Phantom Lord;Iota
The way I see it, the only way that X-42(i) could ever again BE President is thru a Line Of Succession scenario. He could, for example, be elected to the US House, and in the most wildly-improbable circumstance, be chosen as Speaker of the House. THEN, if the then-President AND Vice-President were to assume room temp, THEN X-42(i) could ascend and hold the office for its remaining term. But he could not run to succeed himself.

He most certainly cannot RUN for President again, and since he's ineligible to run for Prez, he couldn't run for Vice-Prez. BUT he could come up in the Line Of Succession. The chances of his doing so, however, verge upon the mathematically impossible. The easiest route would be House Speaker, but that takes the votes of a majority of the members of the majority party. Anyone in Congress who votes for Willy for Speaker just term-limited himself to zero. In other words, it's mathematically possible but politically unthinkable.

Michael

72 posted on 05/09/2002 2:39:05 PM PDT by Wright is right!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]


To: Wright is right!
I've explained elsewhere why I think Clinton could run for VP, so I won't repeat that. But I will say that President Pro Tempore of the Senate seems a more likely scenario than Speaker of the House, given the current incumbents. (IIRC, President Pro Tem traditionally goes to the senior senator of the majority party, but I don't think that's cast in stone -- especially since the Dems are the majority Senate party now.) OTOH, barring a serious sea change, he'll never get elected Speaker.

On a side note, I don't understand what all the fuss is about with regard to this VP thing. If we're willing to assume that (1) Hillary can get elected president and (2) she's willing to do so for the sole purpose of letting BJ be president again -- both of which we have to assume for this ascension-from-vice-president scenario to take place -- then he can act as President without ever having to assume either office. (She can just let him make all the decisions without the title.) I don't think either of those assumptions is justified, but if some people do, I can't understand why they're getting upset over whether he could get the TITLE back.

87 posted on 05/09/2002 5:10:30 PM PDT by Iota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]

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