Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Who Would You Most Prefer to Be the Next U.S. President?

I think if Rick Bin would let me have the tin foil concession on the Campfire I'd be a millionaire in a day.

Ron Paul. Or Rand Paul.

I'd like to see DeSantis as president and Huckabee Sanders as VP.

I'am not some spineless [bleep] worrying about pissing off Democrats so Its Trump for me.

Has nobody studied the Constitution? It's been gone over and over here that two candidates, Prez & Vice Prez, from the same State pose a real Constitutional problem.

https://politics.stackexchange.com/...ent-and-vice-presidents-from-same-states



This part of the 12th Amendment is a holdover from the prior rules:

The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two persons, of

whom one at least shall not lie an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves.

The Founding Fathers thought that if electors only had one vote, they'd each vote for a “favorite son” from their own state. The second vote would ensure that the President would have nationwide appeal.

In practice, we quickly ended up with national political parties instead of a patchwork of regional parties, so the requirement wasn't really necessary. But it was never changed. What did change was that Electoral College ballots now distinguish between President and VP votes.

What the Constitution says is that an elector of State X is not allowed to vote for both a presidential candidate who resides in State X and a VP candidate from State X.

But it's OK for a State X elector to vote for a State X resident for president and a State Y resident for VP. (In fact, most presidential candidates do win their home states.) Or vice versa: A State X elector can vote for a State Y presidential candidate and a State X VP. Just not both from State X. On the other hand, electors from State Y and State Z are perfectly free to vote for two State X candidates.

This is from the Constitution's viewpoint that assumes electors make their own decisions on whom

to vote for. With political parties and pledged electors, it doesn't quite work that way.

So, what would happen if a party nominated a presidential candidate and a VP candidate from the same state? Without loss of generality, I'll assume that the state is Texas (and thus, that the party is the Republican party).

For the electors on the other side of the Sabine or Red Rivers, there would be no problem. None of them would be voting for a resident of their own states, so they'd meet the Constitution's requirement.

In Texas, however, electors would be prohibited from voting for both halves of their party's ticket. What they'd probably do is to vote for their party's presidential candidate, and become “faithless electors” when it came to the VP, either abstaining from that vote, or voting for a non-Texan (presumably, a different member of their own party) for that office.

Suppose that the election was close enough that Texas would swing it. The Republican presidential candidate would have an absolute majority of the electoral votes, and thus win the election, but no VP candidate would have a majority. The VP would then be elected by the Senate.

If the (newly-elected) Senate were controlled by Democrats, we'd end up with a President and Vice-President from different parties, and fights over the Secret Service budget.

To avoid this scenario (and for other “balancing the ticket” reasons), presidential candidates never nominate VP candidates from their own states.

Not that big an issue in today's day and age.

Trump could easily change residence to any number of States in which he owns property.

But, I'd guess the issue would more likely be ................would DeSantis serve under Trump? Big egos don't always mesh.

A swing state with a big population might be a good move.

He may have residency n FL for tax purposes, so he'd likely have to pick a tax friendly one.....


Or just shell out some more money. It's not like he's broke!

Judgement isn’t a Clean Process ..

Historically Very Messy..

Blood and A SS and lots of Rubble ..

Rand Paul

More stupid idiocy from a never-Trump.

This has been discussed multiple times.There is no constitutional problem or prohibition against two candidates from the same state being on the same ticket, as you have so hysterically implied on this and previous occasions.

It seems as though many have studied the constitution,with you being the exception.


This has been posted before but it has escaped l2s's meager intellect.

Wut bout that Q dude?


Trump with a less infested swamp creature Congres that loves America as much he does

Trump is the only chance this nation has to right the ship and maybe purge the swamp. Everyone else that is going to toss their hat in the ring is part of the swamp ! Yessiree , that includes the Fl gov.

[email]https://truthsocial.com/users/realDonaldTrump/statuses/109786658331271466[/email]

Me

Good catch Pat.

Here it is on youtube.

DeSantis admits that he is a deep state actor,like Paul Ryan.OOOOPS.

It's hilarious to see one side of the coin yelling from the rooftops all the "news" they have come across that proves their conspiracy theories are definitely true and to be believed without hesitation, where as anyone who questions them is a dumbass and not worthy of discussion, much less respect. The fact these same people talk down to others here and use demeaning language anytime anyone disagrees with them shows how little they have a grasp on their own emotions, much less a cogent argument.

In fact, they sound almost like the far left democrats at times, don't they?

Tulsi Gabbard, with Jim Conrad as VP. Or vice versa.

I've still got to say Jim Goad.

https://counter-currents.com/2023/02/state-of-what-union/

He proclaimed, “We are a good people, the only nation in the world built on an idea.” And that’s the problem: Americans are no longer a people. They’re countless different peoples tethered together by the untested idea that this experiment will work, despite the lack of historical precedent of it ever working.

His entire speech was an exercise in futility and impotence. I would have preferred if he’d just walked out to the podium, said, “We’re [bleep],” and then walked away. It would have been more honest.

Throughout the speech, he kept returning to the idea that Americans need to “finish the job.”

Sorry, but the job is already finished.

Abe Lincoln famously warned that a house divided against itself cannot stand. But modern America is far more complicated and unmanageable than a house: It’s a giant low-rent chain motel with 300 rooms divided against one another. It’s not a country anymore; it’s an extortion enterprise. The US is basically a corporate entity with taxing power over 330 million people trapped under the same massive surveillance system. It is more fractured in every imaginable cultural way than at any time in history.