Reasons Why Pence Will Make a Better or Worse President Than Trump

[Ingledsva]

If you truly believe this do you not think that you are advocating for a hostile takeover of the country? This is what 3rd world banana republics do.

Actually if they got the office by criminal acts and foreign government help - then THEY were the HOSTILE TAKEOVER.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Wow. Just wow. What color is the sky in your world?

There are no grounds to argue that the Constitution should be violated in the way you are advocating. Civil societies do not make up new rules about who should be President just because Ingledsva doesn't like the current one.

How exactly would the Constitution be violated.

If they got in by criminal acts - then they have no right to succession in the office. They would have rigged it for themselves to be there.

It is like saying all those dictators around the world whom got in by rigging elections, - after they are found out, - should have the right to put their seconds in, or their sons in succession.

And by the way folks - notice those IFs!

*

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Indiana is a good example of how he would be as president. Which is why I say he would be worse than Trump. At least Trump rambles and babbles and hasn't done a whole lot lately.

 

[esmith]

I realize that there are those that have an issue with the current President, but what I can't understand are those that want to overthrow the duly elected President by use of force or non Constitutional actions.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It should go to Clinton as she had the popular vote. This is logical.

The logical successor is Paul Ryan as it is illogical to indict an entire party. If Paul Ryan has been found guilty of no crimes, then there is no reason for him to not fill his rightful position.

 

[Ingledsva]

I realize that there are those that have an issue with the current President, but what I can't understand are those that want to overthrow the duly elected President by use of force or non Constitutional actions.

"duly elected" being the answer.

If they did these crimes they are NOT "duly elected."

*

 

[Ingledsva]

The logical successor is Paul Ryan as it is illogical to indict an entire party. If Paul Ryan has been found guilty of no crimes, then there is no reason for him to not fill his rightful position.

Except that the Democrats were in power, and Clinton, a Democrat, won the popular vote.

If the Republicans are now in power - because of election crimes - then they have no legal expectation of succession.

*

 

[Twilight Hue]

*
In my opinion, since all were involved, the whole group should be tossed, and the presidency given to the popular vote winner = Clinton, - until another election is held.

At which point - the Democrats had better up their game and listen to the people.

*

Your not suggesting a coup attempt by Hillary? Are you?

I can just picture the woman screaming on the top of her lungs yelling like Napoleon at Waterloo.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Getting a little ahead of yourself I see. Obviously you seem to know more than the rest of us by using the word "when" vice the correct word "if".

Indeed. Assuming that Trump will be impeached assumes a degree of civic-mindedness, intelligence, and obligation to justice in the Republicans of the House and Senate that they haven't demonstrated so far.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Except that the Democrats were in power, and Clinton, a Democrat, won the popular vote.

So? That means nothing now, except for those who want to see the EC abolished.

If the Republicans are now in power - because of election crimes - then they have no legal expectation of succession.

You can't charge every Republican with such a thing. If there is evidence against specific ones, yes, but unless Paul Ryan is found guilty of these alleged crimes there is no reason to prevent him from becoming president.

 

[Ingledsva]

Your not suggesting a coup attempt by Hillary? Are you?

I can just picture the woman screaming on the top of her lungs yelling like Napoleon at Waterloo.

That brings to mind a hilarious picture.

I'm not a Hillary fan.

However, it wouldn't be an actual coup, if the other sides win was a coup d'état.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

So? That means nothing now, except for those who want to see the EC abolished.

You can't charge every Republican with such a thing. If there is evidence against specific ones, yes, but unless Paul Ryan is found guilty of these alleged crimes there is no reason to prevent him from becoming president.

I think you folks are misunderstanding.

IF - Republicans are in the Presidential Power seat because of ILLEGALITIES, - through crimes and hostile foreign government intervention, - then they are NOT legally the elected President, - or legally in power, - and thus should not be able to use succession, - which is in place for a legally elected President and Party.

That leaves two choices - Clinton, or new elections.

*

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think you folks are misunderstanding.

IF - Republicans are in the Presidential Power seat because of ILLEGALITIES, - through crimes and hostile foreign government intervention, - then they are NOT legally the elected President, - or legally in power, - and thus should not be able to use succession, - which is in place for a legally elected President and Party.

That leaves two choices - Clinton, or new elections.

*

The law really doesn't work the way you're describing.

"Trump did illegal things during the campaign" does not imply "the election didn't happen."

 

[Ingledsva]

The law really doesn't work the way you're describing.

"Trump did illegal things during the campaign" does not imply "the election didn't happen."

If - they did illegal things, and used illegal foreign help, to change the election, - then the win would NOT be valid.

*

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If - they did illegal things, and used illegal foreign help, to change the election, - then the win would NOT be valid.

*

Again: not true.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If - they did illegal things, and used illegal foreign help, to change the election, - then the win would NOT be valid.

And that still doesn't open the spot for Hillary. To accuse all Republicans in such a way, you'll need to charge everyone last one of them and invalidate every election across America where they won.

 

[Nous]

How exactly would the Constitution be violated.

What you have advocated would be a direct violation of Article II, Section 4, which provides that the President "shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" (none of those conditions have been met yet), for which Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 provides that the House has the sole power of impeachment, and Article I, Section 3, Clause 6 provides that the Senate has the sole power to try impeachments. Further, Amendment XXV, Section 1, instructs that upon removal of the President from office, the Vice President shall become President. At no point does the Constitution sanction removing whole administrations and putting into office the candidate who did not win the electoral votes. Try to get less goofy.

 

[Nous]

I realize that there are those that have an issue with the current President, but what I can't understand are those that want to overthrow the duly elected President by use of force or non Constitutional actions.

It's said out of ignorance, and it's shameful.

 

[Nous]

• Pence is smarter than Trump (some people might consider that fact a strike against Pence). After all, Pence got into and graduated from law school and passed the bar. In contrast, Trump cannot name a book he has ever read, couldn't get through All Quiet on the Western Front over a period of months, is disinterested in written intelligent briefings (“I like bullets or I like as little as possible”), and unabashedly admits to getting his military advice by “watch[ing] the shows”.
• As far as I know, Pence demonstrates no evidence of being erratic, childishly impetuous, unpredictable like Trump is.
• I believe that Pence would not offend our allies and endanger our intelligence sources by blabbing classified information to the Russians. This is just another aspect of basic commonsense that Pence apparently has and which Trump is void of.
• Pence would not offend our intelligence by blatantly lying about things that are easily discovered to be lies, such phone calls he's had. Again, this is another aspect of basic commonsense.

I just want to add a couple more reasons that I think Pence will make a better President:

• I do not believe that Pence will engage in telephone calls with the Executive Officers of our neighbors such as Mexico or our close allies such as Australia in such offensive and belligerent ways as Trump did immediately after taking office.
• I do not believe the Pence will falsely claim to have won the majority of votes in a state such as Trump claimed about New Hampshire, nor do I believe that Pence will refer to any state as "a drug-infested den".

 

[Twilight Hue]

I think you folks are misunderstanding.

IF - Republicans are in the Presidential Power seat because of ILLEGALITIES, - through crimes and hostile foreign government intervention, - then they are NOT legally the elected President, - or legally in power, - and thus should not be able to use succession, - which is in place for a legally elected President and Party.

That leaves two choices - Clinton, or new elections.

*

That's for the elite to decide. We commoners really have no say in the matter when it boils down to the reality here.

Personally I was prepared for a win by Hillary although I sided with Trump as I'm a proponent for the popular vote. Neither was to my liking as with most people on both sides of the aisle, but that's the way it turned out.

Trump is here to stay for four years. Next election should be as interesting as this one was.