Replies

My concept of how far some people will stretch the constitution has been MUCH stretched the past few terms. If enough of the supreme court claiming Obamacare is a Tax makes that constitutional, than claims of mental illness deemed sufficiently disabling by enough of the 25th's designated arbiters can be constitutional. I'd prefer no such REAL need arise, but such risks are not medically impossible. Rarely seemingly healthy, competent folks can go George III without warning. I'm happy the 25th can cover that as well as the less rare Wilsonian cases.

I think Hillary's ideas are nuts, but I don't think she is nuts herself, at least not now. If some of the medical theories swirling about come true that could change over the next four years in which case I bet that clause will be applied much later than is medically and constitutionally indicated. The left will lie and stall and deny as long as they can get away with it and somewhat longer.

I don't agree with everything I've been told Trump has said, and recognize that not all I've been so told is necessarily what Trump said or intended. However, I don't think Trump is nuts and don't think he's any more likely to become so than any other healthy person his age. But I do recognize there are Trump critics, on both the left and right who'd have you think he's nuts. There are certainly Trump supporters who believe their man has been very poorly treated in certain quarters, who certainly wouldn't believe any such claims, but who also certainly wouldn't be surprised to hear them made. Impeachment requires 'high crimes or misdemeanors;' the 25th doesn't. The 25th requires political willpower, at least some of it closely placed to the President. No matter how crazy WE think Obama has been such political willpower has never been anywhere near him. As a real outsider Trump might not be as well defended. In a year in which anything seems possible it's worth a mention. It might even help Trump win the votes of a few die hard neverTrump/neverHillary sorts who might think Trump, but not Hillary, was replaceable after the election and thus increase Trump votes during the election. Take the votes now, claim a bigger mandate, and resume internecine warfare later when and if needed.

All agree, Trump is different. Many of the normal, reasonable, Trump supporters in the real world voice expectations for the man I like. My predictive powers, developed over the past 48 years, are less optimistic but also probably less reliable than with a conventional candidate. I'll give Trump a chance to happily surprise me; and if he doesn't will resume any needed debate after the election.

With Hillary, there is zero doubt, just corrected spelling for Dante. The inscription over the Gates of Hill read, "Abandon all hope, ye who enter her."