To be fair, the man is traveling constantly right now. I'd be exhausted if I were almost 80 and flying all the time.
To be fair, if you're 80 and the subject of like a dozen court cases, you probably shouldn't be running for president. If he's too tired to pay attention to his court case, maybe he should drop out of the presidential race? Clearly he's too old and low energy to run for president.
I have a hard time believing that he would drop out. Not much in it for him, and I assume that if he loses, he's gonna claim that the election was stolen again anyway to try and keep supporters interested.
If he does, though, what's the succession plan for a nominee? There has to be one, because people could get shot or have a heart attack or something. Do they just choose the second-place vote getter, Nikki Haley? There's no time to run a new primary. Does the party internally pick a new nominee?
#What if a vacancy occurs after the primaries and before or during the convention?
If the leading candidate was to drop out of the campaign after most primaries or even during the convention, individual delegates would likely decide the party’s nominee on the convention floor.
That would shine a spotlight on the normally niche question of who those actual delegates are.
There would be a messy political battle in every state over who would get to be a delegate (if the vacancy happened before many of those people were chosen) and then who they would ultimately support. Even people who did not run primary campaigns could ultimately be considered.
You can assume, for instance, that Vice President Kamala Harris would be a top contender to be on the ballot if, for some reason, Biden left the race. At the same time, given Haley’s weakness in primaries, it seems unlikely that Republicans would coalesce around her if Trump was unable to run.
On the Democratic side, there would also be another group to consider: the “superdelegates,” a group of about 700 senior party leaders and elected officials who are automatically delegates to the convention based on their position. Under normal party rules, they can’t vote on the first ballot if they could swing the nomination, but they’re free to vote on subsequent ballots.
#What if a candidate left the race after the convention?
It would take a drastic event for a candidate to leave the race in the few months between a party’s nominating convention in the summer and the general election in November.
Democrats and Republicans have slightly different methods of dealing with this possibility. You can imagine the end result would probably be that the running mate stepped up to be on the general election ballot, but that is not necessarily guaranteed.
Democrats – The Democratic National Committee is empowered to fill a vacancy on the national ticket after the convention under party rules, after the party chair consults with Democratic governors and congressional leadership.
Republicans – If a vacancy occurs on the Republican side, the Republican National Committee can either reconvene the national convention or select a new candidate itself.
#Would the running mate automatically become the nominee?
An in-depth Congressional Research Service memo also notes that if an incumbent president becomes incapacitated after winning the party’s nomination, the 25th Amendment would elevate the vice president to the presidency, but party rules would determine who rises to become the party’s nominee.
Neither party, according to CRS, requires that the presidential candidate’s running mate be elevated to the top of the ticket, but that would obviously be the most likely scenario.
#Has a candidate ever left the race after the convention?
In modern times, per CRS, the Democrat running for vice president in 1972, Sen. Thomas Eagleton, was forced to step aside after the convention after it was discovered that he was treated for mental illness (1972 was a very different time! Today, thankfully, there is not nearly the stigma attached to mental health).
The DNC actually needed to convene a meeting to affirm Sargent Shriver as Democratic nominee George McGovern’s second-choice running mate.
So probably his running mate if after the convention and probably someone else the party chooses if prior.
Don't do the crime if you can't do the time
He's unfortunately not doing that either
To be fair he's far too old and mentally unfit to be trying to lead the world's largest military.
To be fair he isna terrible person who chose commit the crimes that make all that travel necessary.
His campaigjing also counts as crimes since he regularly incites violence and is clearly committing fraud with his abuse of campaign financing.
Can you point me to your comments where you call out trump for calling Biden "sleepy Joe" despite being the POTUS, when that would make anyone tired?
Hard to point out what they never said
If he didn't want to be in court all the time, maybe he shouldn't have committed all those crimes.
You're the kind of person that will never serve on a jury because you believe that if someone is arrested, they must be guilty. Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is the American standard.
So maybe he should dropout of the race then.
To be fair, maybe the presidency is too much for that crook and he should first deal with his trials?
Oh is he piloting or just tired from not being able to access his uppers on court days?
Congrats on the most unselfaware comment yet. Well done
Fair. I wish people on Lemmy could take a genuine comment for what it is and not over-interpret is as political support, as I am sure you don't support this person.
Why would anyone possibly think a person defending Trump supports him?! /s
Yeah this person totally isn't a rightwing nutjob, with gems like this in their comment history:
There's no correlation between the violent crime rate and firearms regulations in the US.
Calling ~50% of the population "nutjobs" isn't particularly conducive to productive political discourse. Solely using strawman and ad hominem fallacies just make you look like a partisan hack, not a serious person.
It's totally off-topic, but I stand by what I said in that other thread. If you can show me that there is a correlation that evidences decreased violent crime and increased firearms regulation, please let me know, I'm eager to read it. FTR, I get my crime stats directly from the FBI.
I consider myself to be a classical liberal, someone who believes in the liberal values that allowed our great nation to be founded in the first place. To that end, I have no compunction calling out hypocrisy whenever I see it. Do I think Trump is a good person? Hell no. But between him and Biden, I believe that Trump makes the better president. The US and the entire World were objectively better off based on the stats under Trump than they are under Biden.
It is absolutely a lie that 50% of the population supports trump or thinks guns have nothing to do with crime. I won't waste my time with a bad actor like you other than to say in regards to your request for a source about crime: see any country that made guns illegal. I'm truly tired as can be when it comes to dealing with your type. That is why I'm on Lemmy. Maybe you should consider facebook?
I'm a "bad actor" for defending both the Constitution and for expressing an opposing viewpoint? lol, ok then.
FWIF, I don't know for sure what the percentage of the US population is that supports Trump, I just know that Trump is leading Biden slightly or is toe-to-toe with Biden in almost every single poll. I also know that according to a Gallup poll a couple of years ago, 36% of polled people say they are conservative and only 25% say they are liberal, with another 37% identifying as moderate. Considering that Trump is the moderate candidate at this point (Biden has moved consistently to the far left during his presidency), I'd say that assuming ~50% of the population supports or at least would vote for Trump based solely on policy isn't the worst reasoning. https://news.gallup.com/poll/388988/political-ideology-steady-conservatives-moderates-tie.aspx
I suppose providing sources for my claims is further proof I'm a "bad actor", eh?
I'm a "bad actor" for defending both the Constitution
That's rich, you fucking insurrectionist traitor
Trump is the moderate candidate at this point (Biden has moved consistently to the far left during his presidency),
Lololol
Contradicting this post is not equal to supporting Trump.
And yes, I know people are excited here because the same articles were written against Biden, that's an issue with both candidates.
I read their comment history, it seems there is a tendency to go against the leftist pack, but they seem rational enough, I bet you can find a valid source for them (I'm not going to source them myself).
I read some of your comments. I'm not really interested in discussing anything with boring contrarian who defends right wingers
I'm not interested in discussing with people who use straw man arguments so I guess we have an agreement there.
To be fair, the man is traveling constantly right now. I'd be exhausted if I were almost 80 and flying all the time.
To be fair, if you're 80 and the subject of like a dozen court cases, you probably shouldn't be running for president. If he's too tired to pay attention to his court case, maybe he should drop out of the presidential race? Clearly he's too old and low energy to run for president.
I have a hard time believing that he would drop out. Not much in it for him, and I assume that if he loses, he's gonna claim that the election was stolen again anyway to try and keep supporters interested.
If he does, though, what's the succession plan for a nominee? There has to be one, because people could get shot or have a heart attack or something. Do they just choose the second-place vote getter, Nikki Haley? There's no time to run a new primary. Does the party internally pick a new nominee?
googles
https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/12/politics/presidential-candidate-race-drop-what-matters/index.html
So probably his running mate if after the convention and probably someone else the party chooses if prior.
Don't do the crime if you can't do the time
He's unfortunately not doing that either
To be fair he's far too old and mentally unfit to be trying to lead the world's largest military.
To be fair he isna terrible person who chose commit the crimes that make all that travel necessary.
His campaigjing also counts as crimes since he regularly incites violence and is clearly committing fraud with his abuse of campaign financing.
Can you point me to your comments where you call out trump for calling Biden "sleepy Joe" despite being the POTUS, when that would make anyone tired?
Hard to point out what they never said
If he didn't want to be in court all the time, maybe he shouldn't have committed all those crimes.
You're the kind of person that will never serve on a jury because you believe that if someone is arrested, they must be guilty. Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is the American standard.
So maybe he should dropout of the race then.
To be fair, maybe the presidency is too much for that crook and he should first deal with his trials?
Oh is he piloting or just tired from not being able to access his uppers on court days?
Congrats on the most unselfaware comment yet. Well done
Fair. I wish people on Lemmy could take a genuine comment for what it is and not over-interpret is as political support, as I am sure you don't support this person.
Why would anyone possibly think a person defending Trump supports him?! /s
Yeah this person totally isn't a rightwing nutjob, with gems like this in their comment history:
Calling ~50% of the population "nutjobs" isn't particularly conducive to productive political discourse. Solely using strawman and ad hominem fallacies just make you look like a partisan hack, not a serious person.
It's totally off-topic, but I stand by what I said in that other thread. If you can show me that there is a correlation that evidences decreased violent crime and increased firearms regulation, please let me know, I'm eager to read it. FTR, I get my crime stats directly from the FBI.
I consider myself to be a classical liberal, someone who believes in the liberal values that allowed our great nation to be founded in the first place. To that end, I have no compunction calling out hypocrisy whenever I see it. Do I think Trump is a good person? Hell no. But between him and Biden, I believe that Trump makes the better president. The US and the entire World were objectively better off based on the stats under Trump than they are under Biden.
It is absolutely a lie that 50% of the population supports trump or thinks guns have nothing to do with crime. I won't waste my time with a bad actor like you other than to say in regards to your request for a source about crime: see any country that made guns illegal. I'm truly tired as can be when it comes to dealing with your type. That is why I'm on Lemmy. Maybe you should consider facebook?
I'm a "bad actor" for defending both the Constitution and for expressing an opposing viewpoint? lol, ok then.
FWIF, I don't know for sure what the percentage of the US population is that supports Trump, I just know that Trump is leading Biden slightly or is toe-to-toe with Biden in almost every single poll. I also know that according to a Gallup poll a couple of years ago, 36% of polled people say they are conservative and only 25% say they are liberal, with another 37% identifying as moderate. Considering that Trump is the moderate candidate at this point (Biden has moved consistently to the far left during his presidency), I'd say that assuming ~50% of the population supports or at least would vote for Trump based solely on policy isn't the worst reasoning. https://news.gallup.com/poll/388988/political-ideology-steady-conservatives-moderates-tie.aspx
I suppose providing sources for my claims is further proof I'm a "bad actor", eh?
That's rich, you fucking insurrectionist traitor
Lololol
Contradicting this post is not equal to supporting Trump. And yes, I know people are excited here because the same articles were written against Biden, that's an issue with both candidates.
I read their comment history, it seems there is a tendency to go against the leftist pack, but they seem rational enough, I bet you can find a valid source for them (I'm not going to source them myself).
I read some of your comments. I'm not really interested in discussing anything with boring contrarian who defends right wingers
I'm not interested in discussing with people who use straw man arguments so I guess we have an agreement there.
Uh oh, seems we have an Enlightened Centrist™.
The Enlightened-est