Trump selected JD Vance as his Vice President nominee. Thoughts?
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (420)
sorted by:
Millions of Americans own guns to defend themselves and their homes. 90%+ of them have never had to use them for those purposes. Are the guns useless?
Guns didn't use Willie Brown as a "jumping point" to higher positions, refuse to send the electors back to the states, or steal classified docs and sniff/molest kids.
Ok. I agree? I don't really get what you are going on about.
Do you think I am defending Kamala, Biden, or Pence? I am not.
I am simply telling you that the Vice President is not a useless position. Read the constitution and that just because we have not devolved to the Vice President becoming the President in modern history that does not make it useless.
Look - I know what the VP position is for, and what the Constitution (with numerous changes since the beginning) says. The truth is, most of the time all the VP does is preside over the senate to break ties. When necessary they fill in (or step in) for the President. Maybe they represent the President at the Olympics, or Army/Navy game, or whatever. Any of the cabinet members could've done that, without needing a VP. I mean - Joe is sending Jill to the Olympics this time.
We have a succession list. Honestly the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate shouldn't even be in succession since they are from the Legislative Branch and not Executive. Why include them and not the Chief Justice? Secretary of State, then SECDEF seems to me to be the better choices there. Separation of powers is important, but so is the fact that the public elected a rep or a dem for POTUS, and the SoTH could be from another party (Like Trump and Pelosi were). Makes no sense.
It is what it is. The founders gave us this system. If the office of the VP were eliminated, would that hurt the government or the people at all? I don't believe it would - responsibilities would simply shift. In it's current form, the VP really doesn't matter unless the President dies and they have to take over. If they made Secretary of State 1st in line of succession the VP wouldn't matter at all. Someone else could be designated to break Senate ties instead of having the VP from the Executive Branch also work in the Legislative Branch.
As for the guns comment - we were talking about VPs and not guns. I was just being sarcastic and I probably should've just let it go. Sorry about that.
By the way - there are people on this board that probably remember Kennedy/Johnson and Nixon/Ford. It wasn't that long ago, though Kennedy/Johnson was before my time and I was too young for Nixon/Ford.
Maybe some think tank will see this and make some recommendations for the next time Succession is changed. They won't remove the VP, but they could at least yank the Legislative Branch out of succession.