It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help educate a Canadian. Can the Democratic Party put someone else on the ticket for 2012?

page: 1
15
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:04 PM
link   
I've been thinking about this recently and I have looked a little but I thought that asking ATS and the political people here would be a better option.

So can the Democratic party place someone else on the ticket for the 2012 Presidential Elections other than Barack Obama?

I know from reading around the internet and watching some political shows on television that a lot of moderate, centrist Democrats aren't happy with him so if they wanted to, could they replace him? Or would it take an impeachment to get him off the ticket since he is the sitting President? His far left plicies seem to be alienating a large majority of the more moderate left.




posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   
Yes they can but it would be highly unlikely.

That being said, it looks like Biden might get the boot and Clinton might get the nod to take his place as VP on the ticket.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:10 PM
link   
reply to post by GAOTU789
 


Yes they could but they wouldn't dare admit they were wrong about the loser.
edit on 6-1-2012 by LongbottomLeaf because: fixin a typo



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by METACOMET
 


Ya I appreciate that. But why would it be unlikely? If the majority of the party is unhappy with his performance, couldn't they do something?

Would Hillary be happy with just the VP role? The Clinton's are very savvy political people( and ruthless ), if they had a chance of taking Obama out and off the ticket, wouldn't they try it?



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   
All it would take is a challenger to arise and put up a fight against Obama. That's why we have heard rumblings about many different people ranging from Hilary Clinton to Dennis Kucinich.

I would only disagree with your statement about Obama being far left. He continued the Bush doctrine for the most part and even passed his tax breaks.

He would be vulnerable if a true Democrat arose that would not follow the pro-war line that Obama campaigned so hard against, but now seems to be reverting back to.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   
reply to post by LongbottomLeaf
 


But a great measure of a persons character is being able to admit they are wrong. If the majority of Democrats felt they made a mistake, couldn't they try and rectify it?



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by GAOTU789
 

It can be done, in theory. It has been attempted in recent history and for the last walking, talking disaster we had in the White House.

1980 Democratic Primary

Ted Kennedy tried to take it from Carter in the re-election bid. He failed...but it shows how it happens and can be done against a sitting President of the same party. Hope that helps.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by GAOTU789
 


There is no such thing as a "confidence vote" in the US. Obama is the only viable candidate for the Democratic Party in the US. Any division of the party would split the vote and allow a Republican candidate a "walk-in" victory.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by GAOTU789
 
Can they? Legally, yes. Will they? Probably not unless it becomes exceedingly clear that Obama can't possibly win (which we are still a far way away from) - even then, it would be highly unlikely. If they were to change their nominee, it would send the message that they don't believe in their candidate and therefore seemingly admit that they were wrong to have chosen him in the first place. If they were wrong four years ago, why should we think they'd be right four years later?

Politics is not only about greed and power (well, on the surface anyway because they're all only puppets) - ego plays a huge role as well and to admit that they were wrong would be akin to saying "go ahead Mr. Republican Candidate - the keys are yours".

It's disgusting but politics has not been about the good of the people for a long, long time and there's no one party that's any better than the other.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by GAOTU789
reply to post by METACOMET
 


Ya I appreciate that. But why would it be unlikely? If the majority of the party is unhappy with his performance, couldn't they do something?

Would Hillary be happy with just the VP role? The Clinton's are very savvy political people( and ruthless ), if they had a chance of taking Obama out and off the ticket, wouldn't they try it?


There are many reasons that replacing Obama on the ticket is highly unlikely. First of all, Obama has been on the campaign trail since elected and has raised a Billion dollars. Incumbent presidents have unlimited face time with the people whenever they want it. It's too big of an advantage to just give that up.

I think Hilary would be very happy with a VP role. That sets her up nicely for presidential run in the next election. It's the next best thing to being the incumbent.

On a personal note, I don't believe that the party is unhappy with his performance. If anything, the party wants him to be more "progressive" and work even more unilaterally. I've been a registered libertarian since I was 18, so I'm not an Obama fan, nor was I a Bush fan. However, I live in a very liberal part of the country, and pretty much all of my friends and family and co-workers still love Obama and feel he is one of the best presidents ever. I think he is going to be very tough to beat and the dems would never replace him on the ticket.

edit on 6-1-2012 by METACOMET because: sp



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by GAOTU789
reply to post by METACOMET
 


Would Hillary be happy with just the VP role? The Clinton's are very savvy political people( and ruthless ), if they had a chance of taking Obama out and off the ticket, wouldn't they try it?


I think the political savvy point is exactly why Hillary would want the VP role this time around. She ran in the primary and lost. Then like a Phoenix walks right into the Sec of State job. Since the DNC would not split the party and allow her to run against him again, this is her best bet.

Should Obama win this year, with Hillary as the VP, she would be in prime position as the Dem candidate in 2016, just as almost every VP does if they want it. She would then be the only candidate in the pool with Senate, Sec of State, and VP on her resume.

Personally though, I dont think she will be on the ticket at electoin time, but we will see Biden resign in the next year or so and Hillary slide right on in the VP.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Thank you, that helps. That's actually kinda what I was thinking. He gets compared to Carter often and I can understand that sentiment.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by GAOTU789
reply to post by LongbottomLeaf
 


But a great measure of a persons character is being able to admit they are wrong. If the majority of Democrats felt they made a mistake, couldn't they try and rectify it?


Uh...oh...

Character+Democrats=oxymoron

ETA: you can fill in any politicians for the most part.

I don't think the party as a whole can generate a majority to topple Obama's apple cart. Too many Democratic donors have apples in that cart.
edit on 6-1-2012 by Destinyone because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by GAOTU789
 


They could, but they wont out of pride. The democrats and republicans are too busy trying to make the other side look bad that they actually don't care about whats going in Washington. To them admitting they were wrong Is as bad as saying the republicans/democrats we're right. It's all a childish game of ego, power and money.( And people wonder why we lost interest in our politics.)
edit on 6-1-2012 by LongbottomLeaf because: fixin a typo



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:34 PM
link   
There's only three scenarios for the Dems.

1. Obama / Biden is doing well in the polls and don't need help.
2. Obama / Biden aren't doing well in the polls and they replace Biden with Hillary. She's practically a deity in American politics. She is a former first lady who was martyred by her philandering President husband who is also beloved by the Dems, and she is a current Secretary of State. She has been vetted beyond belief and is is hard to imagine anyone who could defeat her as a Presidential nominee on either side.
3.Obama / Biden aren't doing well in the polls and they replace Obama will Hillary. Only way that happens is if Obama is out of the picture - get it - can you say impending false flag blamed on Iran...new war...Hillary and Bill in the White House again.

This is a very real scenario....Barry should be concerned.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:37 PM
link   
reply to post by GAOTU789
 


further to all the replies - obama himself can decline to stand , effectivly forcing an alternate candidate



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by GAOTU789
 


Yes, but they chose not to. One small part of the Democratic Party has managed to take complete control even though they only represent the more radical side of the Left.

Sadly that is true of both Parties, but I suspect the next couple of elections will work that out. That is why power is wisely split up between various branches of government. This will happen from time to time in any system.

Obama is the most radical President since Carter who wants to turn the US into Cuba. Obama is a product of Saul Alinsky's teachings and surrounds himself and associates with other radicals. The Right has the same problem with radicals like Paul and Bachman. Most of us are far more moderate. In fact Independents now are the largest voting block which is a very, very good thing.

Obama is trying to survive so that in his last term he can attempt to force his beliefs on the country even though only a tiny part of us are for that. That is what makes him so scary. He does not want to fix what is wrong, he wants to form an entirely new form of government in the US with Progressive Intellectuals basically being Dictators under a false Democracy.

I think many Democrats are asking themselves why no other candidate came forward also.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:54 PM
link   
Obama won't put Hillary on his ticket. At least if he has any street smarts he won't.

She and Bill would pull an LBJ and have him whacked in a heartbeat.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by GAOTU789
reply to post by LongbottomLeaf
 


But a great measure of a persons character is being able to admit they are wrong. If the majority of Democrats felt they made a mistake, couldn't they try and rectify it?

Most democrats, like republicans, or conservatives/liberals in Canada, are partisan hacks. They will never admit they were wrong.

There's always a minority that hate both parties, but the medias never gives them attention because it's bad for the bottom line.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by The GUT
Obama won't put Hillary on his ticket. At least if he has any street smarts he won't.

She and Bill would pull an LBJ and have him whacked in a heartbeat.


Now now now Gut...we were trying to show the nice Canadian OP that we are civilized...you just had to throw that out didn't you...

But, now that GUT brought it up...our political process is not above such horrid actions....



new topics

top topics



 
15
<<   2 >>

log in

join