Mike Pence

Discussion in 'Politics' started by geordief, Feb 20, 2017.

  1. geordief Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,118
    Is a creationist from what I have heard. If DT was to stand down for whatever reason Pence would be the new president.

    The Republicans did win the election and so , it seems fair that they should be able to appoint the President of their choice.

    However ,having a creationist as President would be extremely discouraging.

    Might it be possible to drive a wedge between Trump and his vice president by means of the media picking up on his presidential qualities . This would surely drive Trump mad for reasons most of us can probably guess.

    Could a campaign of huge praise directed at the persona of Pence lead to his firing by the Big O ?

    Or is he unfireable?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Pence was elected. He cannot be fired by Trump or anyone else. He could be removed from office through impeachment. But I don't see that happening. If Trump runs for POTUS again Trump could drop Pence from the ballot.
     
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2017
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. geordief Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,118
    OK so my idea has no legs
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Trump is plenty friendly to creationists, I don't see the upside of removing Pence.
     
  8. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    I don't see an upside either. But I do think the odds Pence becomes the next POTUS before Trump's term in office is over are pretty good. At least Pence doesn't appear to be as bad as Cheney.
     
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2017
  9. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    But one of the strategies raised was that of enflaming Trumps ego by "admiring" Pence. Thus potentially causing a rift.
     
  10. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Yeah, I don't see how that helps. Pence is suppose to be Trump's watchdog. The strategy would drive a wedge between Trump and Pence causing Trump to be more secretive. Pence cannot be a good watchdog if Trump keeps everything from him. And we have already seen evidence of that. Trump didn't tell Pence about Flynn's lies until Pence discovered it on his own while watching the news.
     
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2017
  11. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    Trump is seriously paranoid. Need I say more?
     
  12. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    Even though Pence may have conservative religious views he would make a much safer and consistent POTUS than Trump IMO
     
  13. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    Why do you think Trump chose him as his vpotus?
     
  14. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    As I understand it was part of a deal to garner the support of main stream Republicans.
     
  15. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    Well add it all up.
    • No tax returns
    • No business separations
    • Pence chosen as party compatible.

    Trump was and is expecting to either be impeached or voluntarily stand down
    He's been allowing for it since day one IMO.
     
  16. geordief Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,118
    From what is being said my idea was both impractical and wrong headed.Pence is unfireable and apparently the best that can be hoped for in the current circumstance.
     
  17. Oystein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    890
    Pence is a rock-solid conservative Republican. No surprises there.
     
  18. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Distraction: Click for mo' rock.

    To the other, President Pence would likely enter office with impeachable offense hanging over him; I doubt the House GOP would impeach, and I doubt the Senate GOP would convict.

    In truth, Speaker Ryan, the reluctant president, would be near enough to clean.

    Remember, Republicans tend to count cosmic points instead of functional purpose. To wit, if Trump is dirty, and the GOP must remove him, it is uncertain what sort of dirt Pence will need in order for the GOP to agree to remove him, and the reason isn't whether Pence is dirty enough or not, but because we never impeached Barack Obama. That is to say, there is a tit for tat notion in certain aspects of Republican politics that excludes consideration of function° as if it was some manner of prejudicial bigotry. Something might be the right thing to do, but Republicans, who complain of "quotas", won't want to proceed against a second guilty conservative, in such a case that, say, President Pence's circumstances might require, until we've equally punished a liberal, by which we mean punish any Democrat for any reason we can invent regardless of any actual facts.

    And, yes, was a day when even I would say it sounds like I'm describing, oh, say, Sciforums, but at the same time, watch carefully what's going on with Republicans.

    One superficial sketch of the difference I might suggest is that once upon a time we online imitated the maneuvers of various rhetoric we admired. Now we have some people in stations of similarly regarded rhetoric who seem to be imitating the imitators. It is what Benjamin DeMott called omni syndrome, except it's not; the natural inclination, when consciously acted upon, is self-promotion through appeal to solidarity. To some degree, that it should happen is natural. To the other, something about function and purpose goes here↱.
    ____________________

    Notes:

    ° If we say a government program should work―

    House GOP leaders have therefore spent more than seven years coming up with a proposal that will please almost no one and even seems to be lacking a purpose. The goal, obviously, is to scrap the Affordable Care Act, but after reading the Republican alternative, I'm not at all sure on why, exactly, GOP leaders have made this a priority.

    Vox's Ezra Klein had a good piece on this: "'In general,' writes Peter Suderman, 'it's not clear what problems this particular bill would actually solve.' This is a profound point. It is difficult to say what question, or set of questions, would lead to this bill as an answer. Were voters clamoring for a bill that cut taxes on the rich, raised premiums on the old, and cut subsidies for the poor? Will Americans be happy when 15 million people lose their health insurance and many of those remaining face higher deductibles? … [T]he biggest problem this bill has is that it's not clear why it exists. What does it make better? What is it even trying to achieve?"

    Those need not be seen as rhetorical questions. Republicans have complained that the deductibles under the ACA were too high, but their new plan will push them higher. Republicans have said "Obamacare" doesn't cover enough people, but their plan will likely take coverage from millions of Americans.

    ―what, exactly do we mean by "work", and what gives any leftist "dictator" like me, or the dastardly Mr. Benen↱, the "right" to "unilaterally decide" that "government policy" "must" "work" or "function"? And it's true, over the years many of us have had discussions that, when we cut through the detail in order to examine the structure, would similarly seem so self-defeating. Wait, wait, wait. Self-defeating, how? And that's the key. What do you mean they must put out the fire? We've had that discussion, actually about fire departments, in recent years in these United States. When I was younger, many Christians would recite a line about letting the coin sweat in the palm of your hand, except it comes from Apocrypha, and rarely did I hear it from a Catholic. These days people try to make a weird doctrinal-ish argument that tends to overlook Matthew 5.42, or 25.35-40; or Luke 6.30; and some would portray Jesus as cynically nihilistic. Or, rather, what do you mean Christians must be charitable. And as stupid as that question might sound, it does exist within our political discourse. If humanity survives long enough to describe this period philosophically, the assessment will note the detachment of rhetoric and logic from function. Then again, it is also true that a Christian can refuse to be charitable; there is, subsequently, no such thing as duress. And this is apparently a period in which many people are willing to abide politically convenient rhetoric without attending logical implications.​

    Benen, Steve. "After seven years of effort, Republicans unveil a woeful health bill". msnbc. 7 March 2017. msnbc.com. 7 March 2017. http://on.msnbc.com/2mTYwes
     
  19. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    From my perspective:
    The Republicans did not win the election.
    Trump did.
    He brought along Pence as a token republican.

    Trump ain't no republican, at least not the republicans of the last 50 years since we lost AuH2O.

    Would you rather have Trump? or a modern day republican as potus?
     
  20. Oystein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    890
    I would have to answer: neither. But then again, I don't see a Dem I would be happy voting for either. I'm screwed.
     
  21. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    Trump is your modern day Republican - perhaps you just haven't caught up with that fact yet.

    I submit the latest person elected President while running on the Republican ticket and voted into office by the majority of Republicans as a... "modern Republican."

    Do you have a better definition? Mine seems to fit the facts of the situation - it's truthful and logically deduced. Then again, as is becoming more and more apparent, logic and truth have precious little to do with anything these days.
     
  22. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Trump, by actual policy and ideology and everything except vulgarity of demeanor, is indistinguishable from Reagan&Bush or W&Cheney. In his demeanor he is essentially indistinguishable from Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, Sean Hannity, and the other intellectual leaders of the Republican Party's electoral base. His support and voting base is the support and voting base of the Republican Party as established since 1980 if not before - nearly forty years now.

    That's your Party, that guy. That's the Republican Party everyone else has had to deal with since Reagan and Gingrich put it together from Nixon's assembly diagram.

    Deal with it. We have to, you have to.
     
  23. Bowser Namaste Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,828
    Pence has no pazazz. He's like a saltine cracker without a slice of cheese. He's probably an honorable guy, but his presidency would be more like that of Gerald Ford--nothing extraordinary.
     

Share This Page