[Bruno]

I just read this article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us...gewanted=print
I guess the NYT is not in favor of Palin, but now she is a VP nominee which brings me to my question:

It seems that the role of VP is at the discretion of the presidential candidate (at least in theory).
I assume there are ways for any president to abdicate (or whatever it is called).

With McCain being as old as he is: wouldn't this leave the door wide open for abuse?
1) Party heads decide who is going to be next prez.
2) they force whichever candiate wins the primaries to accept that person as vp
3) If the candidate wins (50/50) he is forced to step back for health reasons or whatever, and an unelected VP sits on the throne.

[chief]

good question Bruno, I never thought about it that way.
Although it's a disturbing scenario...

[voerman]

Originally Posted by Bruno

I just read this article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us...gewanted=print
I guess the NYT is not in favor of Palin, but now she is a VP nominee which brings me to my question:

It seems that the role of VP is at the discretion of the presidential candidate (at least in theory).
I assume there are ways for any president to abdicate (or whatever it is called).

With McCain being as old as he is: wouldn't this leave the door wide open for abuse?
1) Party heads decide who is going to be next prez.
2) they force whichever candiate wins the primaries to accept that person as vp
3) If the candidate wins (50/50) he is forced to step back for health reasons or whatever, and an unelected VP sits on the throne.

Your scenario has parallels to Ford becoming president but with a slightly more complicated twist:

1) Angew is elected VP under Nixon.
2) Agnew resigns and Ford is picked for the VP slot by Nixon (congress has to ratify) but no election is held.
3) Nixon resigns and now Ford is president.
4) Ford loses the next election.

Lou

[Bruno]

That scenario is even better. Because the VP would not even have to be likeable enough to fit the VP slot in the general election.
You just have to pick a crowd pleaser as VP, replace the VP, drop the P, and you can put anyone on the throne without a problem.

Congress could throw a spanner in the clockwork, but since roughly half of them belong to either party, you only have to influence (bribe or blackmail) a handful of other congressmen to get a yes vote. And since politicians all have skeletons buried somewhere, that last part shouldn't be a problem.

[Wildtim]

It could happen that way. However you would have a new election in less than four years at which time they would be removed.

The president passes no laws he can't even force congress to listen to his proposals, and can't declare formal war or even make a treaty with another country without the consent of congress, and anything he wants to do must be financed by congress.

Even then they can be recalled by the people if the people feel they are acting to egregously.

And to top it all off its a lot better than they way it was origionally set up. Where the VP was the first loser in the general election. Imagine having to worry about your toughest opponent and polar opposite being just one of your heartbeats away from having the job he really wanted in the first place. I'd never allow him or any of his known associates in the same room as me if in the same state.

[JMS]

We have no throne in America Bruno!


Unless of course you count the porcelain throne in every mans castle here in the USA!

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by JMS

We have no throne in America Bruno!


Unless of course you count the porcelain throne in every mans castle here in the USA!

I used the term ironically.
Btw, this is not aimed specifically at you, but I know Americans sometimes poke fun at us who live in a monarchy, but consider this:

I live in a monarchy, yet I know it's mostly ceremonial, and a representative government runs the show, following our laws and constitution.
You live in a representative republic which abhors anything resembling monarchy, yet the Bush Administration runs the country like a tyrant. Maybe he shouldn't and maybe congress could boycot him. But he gets his way all the same.