Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

USA 2024 presidential election

Options
145791014

Comments

  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,829 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    I don't entirely follow your question, but Congress doesn't replace him, the VP automatically replaces him. Congress would need to confirm any replacement VP but it would be the (now) President who would select them.

    Short of him dying, the nominee is going to be Biden.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,063 ✭✭✭✭L1011




  • Registered Users Posts: 12,030 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2



    With the GOP primary dead , I understand why people speculate about replacing Biden, but its so much more complicated than they imagine.

    Biden is still much more popular with the party than any other feasible replacement and is probably a safer bet than pretty much anyone to win the crucial EC states. If he were to suffer some health issues its going to be Harris who will replace him, those who say Newsom, Whitmer etc it just seems very much fan fiction lite than feasible.

    Although can't rule out anything these days I suppose!



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,447 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    I mistyped - I did not mean the US Congress, I meant the Democratic Convention to select the candidate. Biden might indicate/declare that he would not run in 2024.

    Who is capable of generating a following with sufficient name recognition? Well perhaps Al Gore might fill the void. If chosen, he could pick Joe Kennedy III as VP - now there is some name recognition.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,030 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2


    Kennedy got his ass handed to him by Ed Markey not to long ago didn't he?

    Gore and he are not relevant in 2023 , if we somehow get some silliness and its not Biden or Harris, surely one of the popular governors make more sense especially from a swing/red state?



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,207 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    If it's not Biden (and it will be barring Death) then the only alternative candidate is Newsome with Gretchen Whitmer as VP - They would also be my current best bets for 2028.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,030 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2



    Its going to be very messy asking Harris to step aside if Biden has health issues as she is still popular enough in the party and the optics yuck!

    Maybe if Trump was to have health issues then Biden might be tempted to step aside "time to pass the baton to the next generation " as I'd back Haley and to a lesser extent RDS in a general v Biden .

    A lot of big ifs their though!

    Regarding 2028 , Newsom, Whitmer, Beshear, Pritzker seem the obvious bets although you would assume the progressives would have someone to represent them,AOC might be ready?

    What would make that primary even more interesting if Trump were to win in 2024 then I suspect it would be a deeply unpopular presidency and would likely result in good results for the Dems in 2026 and would make the Dems strong favs for 2028 as the USA would have endured about 12 years of non stop Trump drama.

    GOP also surrendering the incumbency advantage in 2028 if Trump were to win next year also, but bless I don't think MAGA thinks to far ahead.🤔



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,062 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    You presume there would be an election in 2028 if Trump won



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,829 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Biden has already declared he is running.

    The primaries start in the next few weeks. Replacing the candidate outside of the primary system would be opening a massive can of worms and, absent a justifiable reason like severe health problems, would lead to significant claims of illegitimacy for whoever the candidate chosen is.

    So in short no, there is zero chance of that happening.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,746 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout



    Of course he could lose to Trump. That country is so divided now anyone could run against Trump and it'd still come down to a few tens of thousands of votes in 5 or 6 swing states.

    Al Gore was seen as a very boring, wooden politician and campaigner. Trump would likely turn all the environmentalism against him and scare people into believing that Gore would ban beef burgers and pickup trucks if he won. At the same time the left wing of the party would be reminded of all the right-wing policies that the Clinton administration rolled out in the '90s so that they'd stay at home or vote third party. Furthermore, all of the rust belt voters would be reminded of the jobs that were shipped overseas as that administration embraced globalisation.

    Of course Al Gore would be a superior president but I have zero confidence that the average floating American voter would realise that.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,447 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    The Dems need a backup for Biden.

    I do not follow USA politics to have any idea who would be good. Trump would be a disaster, and not just for USA politics but for the worl.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,405 ✭✭✭✭Beechwoodspark


    I am completely Anyone but Trump - he is a lunatic only fit for the maximum security federal prison system or, being generous, confined to the old folks home...

    However - I have to say Biden needs to step aside - too old and prone to “senior moments”, stumbling, forgetfulness, coming out with awful inappropriate speeches.

    I can totally understand why people would be slow to support his second term.

    Ideally someone around 50 from the Dems should step forward.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,829 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    They are not getting one. The Democrats will address this problem if and only if Biden drops dead.

    I would add, that all polls indicate that in an open, contested primary Biden would win anyway. Is it good? No, of course not. But it is what it is.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,063 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    There is absolutely no circumstance at all where they would announce a backup; no matter how many odd ways you think one might be needed.

    The legal backup is Kamala Harris for as long as he remains President. That's it. Nothing else is going to happen.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,447 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    That is true. But it does not change the need for a backup.

    However, the GOP also need a backup in case SCOTUS rule Trump out of the running, either by deciding he is not immune, or in fact is unfit to hold any office.

    We shall see.

    We live in interesting times.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,829 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Biden has passed significant amounts of bipartisan legislation.

    That right wing loons hate him is not his fault. This is like people claiming that Obama stoked racial tensions as if it wasn't the fault of people who just hated having a black President.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,829 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    It does change the need for a backup because there is absolutely no mechanism for one and there is already a presumptive nominee. There is no more "need for a backup" then there was when Obama was the nominee for re-election.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,130 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Lest we forget, many of the GQP loons that voted against things like the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs act were the first out there to praise the work projects ending up in their States.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,207 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    And then you have Marjorie Taylor Greene who claims that her State doesn't want investment from the EV Battery Industry that would generate massive revenue and thousands of jobs.

    Why you might ask?

    Because they are the Bible Belt , not the Battery Belt or something..

    Greene also attacked battery plant initiatives, claiming it allows China into the country. The plant in Cartersville is ran by SK Innovation, a South Korean company.

    After ranting against electric vehicle technologies, Greene bizarrely pitted the push for electric vehicle plants against the Bible:

    “We’re the Bible Belt down here. We don’t want to be the battery belt.”

    Sure sure.. Because Bibles pay the bills....



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,746 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    A likely unpopular opinion: I think Barack Obama was a brilliant orator and campaigner but I believe that Biden has been a better President.

    It doesn't look great for him right now but he has been written off constantly and he seems to manage to find a way of bouncing back.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,130 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Obamacare was a great accomplishment with an entirely uncooperative GQP in place; it didn't go far enough is the analysis we see today, and the health insurers strengthened their, well, death grip on the nation as a result.

    Biden was handed a s**t sandwich by his predecessor and has gotten amazing things done, Obama had to cope with GWB's catastrophic administration, both domestic (remember the 'green shoots' economy?) and internationally, which the US hasn't recovered from yet; prior to Gaza, Biden was on track to maybe oversee a resumption of relations between Israel and Saudi, which would have been a seismic shift in the ME, and as many say, he's played a blinder on Russia, hundreds of thousands of dead RuZZian military, no US military casualties.

    I'd still go with Obama having a bigger challenge. Biden could have excelled his achievements (still might, he's only had 3+ years, lest we forget there's another to go.) Obama had 8



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,062 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    Obama care was a failure imo. Obama had control of both Housesf or his first 2 years, and couldn't get universal healthcare done. Obamacare is a sop to the insurance industry that falls far short of what's needed



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,642 ✭✭✭eire4


    The word "unhinged" springs to my mind when I hear or read the latest verbal diarrhea from Greene.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,130 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    I see your point, but the removal of the 'preexisting condition' get-out-of-jail-free for the insurance companies went away, and that you can keep your children on your insurance until they're 26, were big deals in the US. US healthcare is bonkers, and what sounds like small improvements in any country with a functioning health service (I include Ireland in it as a stretch, but whatever...), weren't to US citizens.

    Obama brought the US back from a really bad place. Biden hasn't brought it back from such depths, it had a basically functioning economy when he started, unlike Obama who inherited a frozen economy that needed bailouts to keep the banks from failing, and disastrous international adventures like Iraq.

    But, like I said, it's only year 3 in Biden's administration.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,829 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Obamacare was undoubtedly a success, just not an unqualified one.

    The reliance on Republican governors to roll out the expansion of medicare being a huge issue. But somehow those governors simply refusing to accept free money on principle to ensure people remained uninsured is seen as a positive by their voters. It is hard to argue against that kind of thinking.

    He also attempted to negotiate with Republicans throughout the drafting to make it at least somewhat bipartisan. That was a total waste of time as they were discussing nothing in good faith.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,130 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    The Medicaid expansion could've happened without Obamacare. It allowed people with very very limited resources some healthcare beyond what you might get in an emergency room. It's the lowest rung of US healthcare and you really don't want to be on it if you can access anything better.

    Medicare is what's provided for over-65's and by all reports is excellent, better than private insurance. And the majority on Medicaid are children, which makes the GQP states who opposed expanding it seem even worse, but they're typically Southern states with the lowest life expectancies, worst maternal outcomes, worst childhood health statistics and so on. The usual players - Louisiana, Florida, Texas, Mississippi, etc. And the turkeys living in them continue to vote for Thanksgiving.

    Agreed, Obamacare was not an unqualified success, we had our hopes up then came the lobbyists.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,062 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    The part that always astounds me around the healthcare debate in the US, is that Republicans typically argue about government spending and cost to tax players. Yet study after study shows that a Medicare for all, single payer system would be dramatically more cost efficient, both in its own terms relative to private insurance, and in the ancillary benefits from a healthier populace. Obviously, looking for intellectual consistency with Republicans is a fools errand, but the dissonance is striking.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,062 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets




  • Registered Users Posts: 13,130 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    It's not like UnitedHealth wasn't lousy to begin with - it was. Seems like they've made it worse.

    It's important to point out that this was Humana's "Medicare Advantage" plans, which are marketed to Medicare recipients as 'just as good as original Medicare, but you save money' yadda yadda. The USG is looking into these things, they're basically stripped-down Medicare benefits, a big profit center for insurers and basically awful. Older Americans are wise to avoid them. The best thing about Medicare is how simple it is - either your doctor accepts it, or doesn't (most do especially those whose clientele includes seniors), and the Doctor and Medicare handle all the billing. No muss, no fuss. Works the same anywhere in the US.

    With these medicare 'advantage' plans, you're at the mercy of the vendor of the plan who can loophole it to death - never in your favor, have all sorts of restrictions like it doesn't cover when you're out of your local area, e.g., traveling.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement