USA 2024 presidential election

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121757809#Comment_121757809

I can't imagine him wanting to retire even if Trump were to win. He's only 75 which is nuts considering he's been on the court since 1991. He probably thinks that he's get alt least another decade in him (Stephen Breyer retired at 84). Besides, if he's not a supreme court justice then he won't have all of his billionaire "friends" willing to ferry himself and his lunatic wife around on private planes and taking them on fancy holidays.

AbusesToilets

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121757809#Comment_121757809

Can't come soon enough. Ghoul of a person

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121758246#Comment_121758246

In case you (or anyone else) hasn't heard it there's a brilliant 4-part podcast on him.

It dives deep into his childhood, which was messed up, to say the least, as well as his career prior to being on the Supreme Court.

The picture it paints is if a deeply odd and unpleasant individual who seems to care about nothing apart from his own advancement. Even though he has reached the pinnacle of his profession he is still fueled by grievance and bitterness (sounds familiar) against those who he thinks slighted him.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/part-one-the-clarence-thomas-story/id1373812661?i=1000571206147

AbusesToilets

It's darkly impressive how awful a collection of individuals make up the conservative justices. One of the most destructive courts in the history of the nation, which is saying something.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121758446#Comment_121758446

And the truly dystopian aspect is that in the great supposed beacon of democracy, they're a bench of lifetime appointments without any realistic way to remove them except through death. It's a nonsense and that's not even my liberal sensibilities talking 'cos the current lot are made up of conservatives: it could be room of Ruth Bader Ginsburg clones and I'd still think it deeply undemocratic to have them sit for life without any possibility of replacement.

I have been vaguely curious why the Founding Fathers™, or whichever administration introduced them, never saw fit to add an escape hatch or sensible method to remove sitting judges. Or maybe it was one of those aspects from fadó were a "lifetime" meant you were dead by 50 either way, so no great need to add an upper limit (see why the original pension age was 65)

AbusesToilets

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121758478#Comment_121758478

While it might be impossible currently to pass an amendment to mandate term limits, there's definitely legislative action that could curtail the reach of the SC. Increase the number of justices, make it a rotational position per judicial season etc.

There's also the premise that nothing in the Constitution grants the court the right of judicial review. So if a Democratic Congress passed laws that the court opposed to, there's no requirement for them to give credence to the court's opinions on the matter. I'm sure the originalists on the court would be happy to adhere to that reading of the Constitution....

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121758478#Comment_121758478

It's an interesting question alright about why there are no limits. I just checked to see what ages the members of the very first supreme court died at (there were only 6 justices on it originally)

• John Jay - 84
• William Cushing - 78
• James Wilson - 56
• John Blair Jr. - 68
• James Iredell - 48
• John Rutledge - 61

So yes one of them did die before 50 but a couple of them lived to ages that would be normal these days. As such I don't think the omission of an age limit was due to them thinking that people would be unlikely to live into their 80s.

eire4

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121757809#Comment_121757809

I totally agree. It is ridiculous they have lifetime appointments. They should at the very least have an upper age limit say 70 at which they have to retore after reaching.

eire4

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121758246#Comment_121758246

I would say your being very generous there in that description of him.

Rjd2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121759998#Comment_121759998

Good value losing bet and I know because I have had my share of them over the years😀

Firstly I don't think Biden will step aside, yes he is not in good shape, but we must remember Dem voters overall like him and while the polling favors Trump its not exactly catastrophic as Biden has time on his side to make it up, its about 8 months away the big day!

Also they don't have many better options ready to go for November. Harris is not a safer option option whatsoever, donors like Newsom and he clearly has been building his national profile with an eye on November but ultimately what he has achieved in politics,,,,won in California? Wow

He's also got a whiff of RDS about him , solid in his backyard but some might consider him to radical for the crucial battleground middle of the road states.

Whitmer is the only other serious alternative, she would be a safer bet than Newsom/ Harris when it comes to the swing states as she would deliver Michigan for Dems which is a huge selling point. The Dems have plenty of people who will be ready to in 2028, but its to late for anyone else to establish themselves in case of Biden dropping out suddenly.

!I don't think it will be her v Trump, but I'd rather put a tenner on her at 125/1 than the silly odds we see for Michelle Obama who is 10/1 or so with some bookies 🤣

Raoul Duke III

Yes, it's clearly a shot to nothing and no sweat if Biden does indeed seek and get an uncontested nomination.

Weakness in politics though tends to snowball and the entire US population outside the White House is telling Joe it's time to go. The question is will he be LBJ or Carter....

Raoul Duke III

And Michelle Obama even being quoted in the betting is indeed a joke!

AbusesToilets

One thing this theoretical shows is the weakness of picking Harris for VP. She was an awful choice to begin with, and looks worse when you float the idea of replacing Biden for the nomination.

Igotadose

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121761031#Comment_121761031

The entire US population? No.

LBJ was in a weak position, Biden isn't. Economy booming, inflation coming down. 8 months to go, a lot can happen, like a pandemic. At least this time the office of pandemic preparedness exists.

Raoul Duke III

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121762121#Comment_121762121

If you look at the polls specifically focussing on his age, they are unequivocal. Even 50% of Dems say he's too old!

Running against Trump of course is a blessing. So even infirmity need not disbar you when he's the alternative...

Rjd2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121761987#Comment_121761987

Cynic in me thinks Biden wanted someone who would not pose a challenge to him long term. IIRC he was linked to the likes of Warren, Rice and Whitmer before who no matter your views on their specific politics are much more formidable politicians.

AbusesToilets

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121762535#Comment_121762535

It strikes as a failure for the DNC to not pick a VP with actual Presidential potential. The possibility for them needing to step in was a legitimate one, and frankly, any Democratic candidate was likely to beat Trump in 2020. Biden didn't need anything that Harris had to off to get them the win.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121762951#Comment_121762951

Name ANY VP with Presidential potential???

Bush Sr. is the only former VP that went on to be President in the last century.. Not a single VP has ever amounted to anything of consequence after their term as VP.

Gore arguably should have beaten Bush Jr. but beyond that - Nothing.

And no "any Democratic candidate" wasn't likely to beat Trump in 2020 .

Harris was picked specifically to placate the Progressive wing of the party/voting base and she served that purpose and she'll serve it again this time as well.

AbusesToilets

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121762984#Comment_121762984

Ehh Harris couldn't be further from the Progressive wing if she tried. Look at her record in office or her positions during the campaign. She is a dyed in the wool. neo-liberal corporatist. Sanders or Warren would have beaten Trump handily imo. The voter base was already energized after 4 years of Trump, and both of them actual supported progressive policy positions, unlike Biden, Buttigeig and Harris.

Gore and Biden are obvious examples of VPs with strong presidential potential.

Brussels Sprout

I think Biden committed to picking a black woman as VP as part of the deal he made with Jim Clyburn to get his support in the South Carolina primary in 2020 (and possibly putting a black woman on the supreme court if he got the chance). That deal ultimately turned the primary contest around for him.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121762984#Comment_121762984

Nixon ran JFK very close as VP in 1960, and obviously had his infamous second act as President but that wasn't as 'VP'.

But in general I think your point stands.

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121762984#Comment_121762984

Besides George Bush Sr, six other former VPs went on to become president in the last century:

• 3 became President indirectly but subsequently won re-election: Coolidge, Truman & Johnson
• 1 became President indirectly and failed to win re-election: Ford
• 2 left office entirely and subsequently got elected President: Nixon & Biden

Raoul Duke III

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121762951#Comment_121762951

No-one ever picks their VP candidate on their suitability as a potential president. They pick them to help win the election - usually with a specific state or demographic in mind.

AbusesToilets

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121763349#Comment_121763349

My point is that Biden is unique in his age profile. It's not an unreasonable prospect that he would need replacing, more than any normal president. Certainly looking ahead to the 2nd term. Having a viable candidate to replace Biden for this election might have been a beneficial move for the Democrats.

Raoul Duke III

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121764005#Comment_121764005

Yeah, I take your point but the political calculus of the Biden coalition is such that it's highly unlikely he would drop Harris now.

I'm actually struggling to think of a president running for a second consecutive term who did dump their VP. In modern times. I know FDR did.

Igotadose

Uhh, Gore won the popular vote. Would've made a much better POTUS than GWB.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121770222#Comment_121770222

Wouldn't he also have won Florida too if the recounts were allowed to continue? It's quite something to consider that the "Brooks Brothers riot", a totally orchestrated agitation to shut down the recount amounted to a dry-run of what became GOP policy 20+ years later; plus ca change n' all that jazz.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_Brothers_riot

Igotadose

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121770249#Comment_121770249

yeah, the GQP can't win the POTUS race anymore without cheating. Florida was the most obvious dry run (Pam Bondi and Roger Stone should suffer for their actions, at least it seems like Stone might). Gerrymandering, voter suppression, and then... there's TFG. Disenfranchisement, violent overthrow of results, criminal conspiracies...

What's pretty scary is how much SWATting is going on in the US. The Lincoln Project guy detailed his experience in a Youtube video. BBC reported on a NY Rep being SWATted recently: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68297349

I'm afraid the cretins doing the swatting will ramp it up as we get closer to the election. SWATters are using VoIP, voice synthesizers and burner phones to pull it off, which likely will make acquiring that kind of tech harder in the US for its legitimate users.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121770249#Comment_121770249

And the legal arguments used by Bush to get the win in Florida were quarterbacked by a young John Roberts whose efforts were later rewarded with the big chair in the Supreme Court.

He was ably assisted in those efforts by none other than Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney-Barrett.

eire4

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121762984#Comment_121762984

As a point Gore did beat Bush albeit by about half a percent but he did win. But given the US is not a full democracy and the person with the most votes doesn't automatically win the result was overturned by the undemocratic electoral college.