Why Not Bipartisan Pres and VP?

Discussion in 'Politics and Society' started by path_of_one, Sep 25, 2008.

  1. path_of_one

    path_of_one Embracing the Mystery

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Messages:
    2,906
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've often wondered this, and McCain and Obama's (sort of) cooperation on the economic bailout issue brought it to my mind again:

    McCain, Obama headed to Washington for bailout talks - CNN.com

    Why can't we just have each party run someone for President, and the loser is VP? Wouldn't that force bipartisan politics and get rid of a lot of the waste in campaigning that stems from the current win/lose all situation?

    I'd rather see Obama and McCain be forced together than to have either Biden or Palin in the picture, to be honest. I think it'd make for a much more representative executive branch.

    When the country is divided 50/50, why not let the executive branch also be divided in order to be representative? It'd be yet one more check/balance on the system. Yeah, it's a pipe dream because of course it won't change, but I still think it'd be a good idea.
     
  2. seattlegal

    seattlegal Mercur├Žn Buddhist

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,803
    Likes Received:
    233
    Actually Path, the runner up in Presidential elections became VP before the passage of the Twelfth Amendment. John Adams was the runner up for the presidential election after George Washington, and therefore became the VP.

    Only a glitch in the politicians trying to play the system allowed Thomas Jefferson to become the runner up and win the VP slot in the 1796 election.

    Oh, with the VP being from a different party, the President could be more in danger of assassination driven by partisan hatred...
     
  3. wil

    wil UNeyeR1 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    22,533
    Likes Received:
    2,400
    Ah yes, back when Senators were appointed!

    Lieberman was up there on the short list for McCain, if they weren't both so old I'd say he'd been the choice.

    A McCain presidency has an extreme likelihood of being one of the most bipartisan presidencies in our history. He has a record of crossing the aisle, and I have no reason not to believe we'll see him bringing in a variety of folks on every discussion.

    I see him as having a deep concern for the future of the US, domestically and internationally.

    I'll still be voting third party though.
     
  4. path_of_one

    path_of_one Embracing the Mystery

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Messages:
    2,906
    Likes Received:
    0
    But it appears that if McCain wins and dies in office, a Palin presidency has the capacity to be one of the most one-sided and extreme presidential terms in history. She's in a minority politico-religious group that is quite extreme in its ideology. Though I would be a supporter of Obama due to my views on the war, I was very receptive to McCain until he chose Palin as running mate... a choice that seemed impulsive (he met her twice). Palin has virtually no foreign policy experience and very little national experience, is not representative of the bulk of the American populace, has ties to organizations that were for things like secession of Alaska from the nation, and seems like she was clearly a choice primarily to suck up to women and to the religious right. Furthermore, as she does not have a great deal of person experience, if she were more open to listening to others' advice I might be willing to see her in a different light. But from what I've heard from others that worked with her in Alaska, she is a sort of "my way or the highway" kind of person.

    I respect a lot of things about Palin. But I wouldn't in a gazillion years think she's ready to lead if McCain died in office. And if people weren't so caught up in religious issues in the Republican party, I'd be willing to bet they wouldn't think so, either.
     
  5. Dogbrain

    Dogbrain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    813
    Likes Received:
    0
    That is how it originally was done in the USA. The top vote-getter was President, and the runner-up was Vice President. Partisanship was even worse back than than it is today.

    Because that ended up paralyzing the executive branch when it was actually done.

    Just what passes for "history" classes in school these days? It's no wonder that so many people are wanting the public "education" system to be scrapped.
     
  6. path_of_one

    path_of_one Embracing the Mystery

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Messages:
    2,906
    Likes Received:
    0
    I knew that it was once done in American history, but as it has not been the case for quite some time, I am wondering why not when the populace is divided.

    In the case of reviewing the last 8 years, I would have preferred a frozen, immobilized executive branch to what we had.
     
  7. Quahom1

    Quahom1 What was the question?

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,906
    Likes Received:
    5
    The Carter administration was "frozen" and that did us no good at all. The VP is the president of the Congress, and the tie breaker for a deadlocked congress. He or she has got to be in the wings of the president, not on the outside.

    Reagan was 68 when elected, and he stuck around for eight good years (even hosted aerobic exercise videos).

    McCain survived five years at the Hanoi Hilton. I don't think he is about to drop dead anytime soon.

    Palin is vibrancy injected into the matrix with McCain's experience. She also has years of experience that few wish to credit her with. She also is for a federal government that does not run ramshod over citizens (for their own good).

    McCain knows when and how to fight. Palin knows when and how to make peace (good compliment there).

    Palin also does not owe political favors to over half the congress (or their lobbyists). No bad habits.

    McCain is the "moderate", and Palin is a bit more conservative, but not stifling.

    Obama has what it takes and Biden is experienced, but the combination is not a good one. Obama isn't ready yet, and Biden still treats this as a "dream" that he's going to wake up from. Obama doesn't listen to advice, and pays for it more often than not. He also is not much of a realist when it comes to the world, and has yet to provide the country with his vision of "change" yet there are less than 40 days to election time.

    And on the defense of Bush, well he didn't ask to become a war time president, nor did he ever figure he'd have to deal with a "feel good" congress, and an "in your face" judicial branch, and a society with the focus, demands, discipline and attention span of a 10 year old.

    But what he did do, was create a generation of well disciplined, honorable, selfless, intelligent, selfsacrificing citizens, who the world sees will do what ever it takes to defend our nation and our people, despite what the world can throw at them.

    That one percent of the population will make a difference in this country in the years to come.
     
  8. Pathless

    Pathless Fiercely Interdependent

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    2,526
    Likes Received:
    0
    What? I'm used to disagreeing with you, Quahom1, and this post of yours just reinforces for me the fact that you and I are ostensibly looking at the same country and seeing vastly different pictures. It's amazing, really. Wowzers.

     
  9. Dogbrain

    Dogbrain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    813
    Likes Received:
    0
    Because that is Congress's job.
     
  10. earl

    earl ?

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,623
    Likes Received:
    18
    I think we also see vastly different Palins around here. Does her pastor "trump" Obama's ex-pastor? ;) earl
     
  11. Quahom1

    Quahom1 What was the question?

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,906
    Likes Received:
    5
    No, but her pastor is still her pastor, while Obama's is an ex. And the reason Obama gave up his association with his pastor was because of the political agenda being espoused. It was decidedly detrimental to his political carreer and reputation...
     
  12. Quahom1

    Quahom1 What was the question?

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,906
    Likes Received:
    5
    Yes, it is amazing, idnt it? :D
     
  13. earl

    earl ?

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,623
    Likes Received:
    18
    I know that Q and I'm thinking that Palin's association with her pastor is potentially as politically damaging as the claim Obama's was. The rap on the latter being that he must have "agreed" with his views to have associated with him so long. If one used the same view with Palin, that would certainly cast aspersions on her-perhaps unfairly for either of them. earl
     
  14. path_of_one

    path_of_one Embracing the Mystery

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Messages:
    2,906
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry, Q, but if Palin is a "bit more conservative, but not stifling" and yet she's against teaching teens about birth control (despite having a pregnant underaged daughter), is for criminalizing abortion even in cases of rape and incest, for teaching creationism in schools, sees the world as "good guys and bad guys" (her take on the Israel and Iran issue- see Katie Couric's interview), praying for a gas pipeline and chanting "drill, baby, drill"....

    I'm not seeing much moderation there. I'd like you to point out to me how she is only "a bit" conservative, because I know a lot of "a bit" conservatives, and she is far, far beyond any of them in right-wing religious ideology.

    Furthermore, her interview sounded like she was (I'll roughly quote from an economics professor who analyzed it):

    "A student in an intro level economics class who has no clue how to answer the essay question on the final exam, so she just throws a bunch of words in there and hopes they make sense. Unfortunately, if you know anything about economics, they don't."

    It doesn't bode well.

    As for P and VP, seems that it's a darned if you do, darned if you don't history. If opposite political parties, they are frozen and we're in trouble. If the same (as we've just had), they do a ton (not necessarily what the people want, mind you) and we're in trouble.

    I'm sorry, but with dismal ratings, I'm not the only one who finds the BushCheney Co. to have been corrupt (under investigation for approving torture methods against the Geneva Convention, plus the whole fiasco about poor checking of intelligence to begin with). All I know is that eight years ago, my life and nearly every other person I know's life was pretty decent and now it is pretty lousy. And I don't excuse Congress, either. I'm not a Democrat. I'm independent.

    If any people came out of the last 8 years with some sort of education, it was not due to NCLB, which has nearly uniformly been called horrific by educators in all levels of education. If people came out with a sense of social justice, it certainly wasn't due to BushCheney and their endorsements of torture.

    And if you are referring to the military... I've met a lot of vets from this war who are permanently damaged and the government has done little to nothing to care for them. They sit homeless outside my office buildings and on the freeway off-ramps, and when I've talked to them, many feel deeply betrayed by this country and President. There are quite a few vets who are for peace and against the President, and who realized we went where we never should have been, based on faulty intelligence. There is no one single veteran perspective. And there is no single-track journey through the military to goodness. Some veterans come out with a deep appreciation for life, a dedication to others, and skills. Some come out with a brain injury, PTSD, and a sense of betrayal. And some ended up torturing, raping, and murdering people while abroad. People are people.
     
  15. Quahom1

    Quahom1 What was the question?

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,906
    Likes Received:
    5
    Earl, going after an established form of government that society is used to is one thing. Going after a person who allegedly harmed others and is not working within society's norms is another.

    Palin was prayed over way before ever announcing her governorship, Obama was "used", during his presidential run.

    Do we see eye to eye now?
     
  16. Quahom1

    Quahom1 What was the question?

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,906
    Likes Received:
    5
    I'm not going to get into the weeds with you. May the best party do the least damage, to our already mucked up society.

    Is Obama better? Or is McCain? Time will tell.

    I will point out an irony however. Since this election run has been going on, one has called for and taughted change, while the other has made change happen, not once, or twice, but three times...

    Change means "unpredictable", so far only one has been that.
     
  17. earl

    earl ?

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,623
    Likes Received:
    18
    Having a stark fundamentalist Christian anywhere near the White House scares the crap out of me. I might actually have to vote this year.:D But, we have such deep holes we've dug ourselves into with foreign and domestic policy under Bush, that, whoever wins the presidency, he will be up against some very tough challenges. earl
     
  18. Quahom1

    Quahom1 What was the question?

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,906
    Likes Received:
    5
    Says you. I think we are right where we are supposed to be...;)
     
  19. Faithfulservant

    Faithfulservant Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    2,792
    Likes Received:
    0
    lol scary if the democratic/republican ratio in the US is anything like it is here I think Obama is going to be elected because I think its just me and Q that I can tell
     
  20. Faithfulservant

    Faithfulservant Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    2,792
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just have to say this because its on my mind. My impression of Obama thus far is that he does a great job of getting the excitement up but lacks something in the following through I still dont know what he is going to do to change everything... I think hes stalling because he doesnt even know and maybe is hoping that he gets the presidential nomination on the promise of the climax alone.

    Sorry for the lame analogy but its how I see it.
     

Share This Page