Join 3,501 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)

Sharing the Presidency
March 24, 2008 11:45 AM   Subscribe

How Obama and Clinton could run together and take turns being president under the 25th Amendment.
posted by think.how.simple (23 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: a single news link post to another obama article? -- jessamyn



 
uh, no.
posted by notsnot at 11:56 AM on March 24, 2008


Why, it's just so crazy... it might work!

If only there were a way, some way that's quantifiable, that's measurable to determine which of the candidates should win the nomination. Like some means to determine if one candidate had more of something than the other, then the former would win.

Oh, well. It's beyond me.
posted by psmealey at 11:56 AM on March 24, 2008 [1 favorite]


It works for Castro, so why not us?
posted by eegphalanges at 11:57 AM on March 24, 2008


As the ancient proverb goes, you cannot make a pony out of ice cream and ride it.
posted by klangklangston at 12:00 PM on March 24, 2008 [6 favorites]


What a cute idea! Maybe they can share clothes and toys as well.
posted by solipsophistocracy at 12:00 PM on March 24, 2008 [2 favorites]


That's a pretty damned liberal read of the 25th Amendment, and one that is unlikely to fly with the Supreme Court - or with the general public. It's also just asking for an assination/overthrow plot.
posted by sadiehawkinstein at 12:02 PM on March 24, 2008


A: this is a terrible idea

B: I like how in the craven scramble to justify Hillary's staying in the race by whatever absurd metric her supporters figure they might conceivably sucker the populace with, they're now trying to suggest she should win because she "wins big states" which have greater Electoral College votes... aside from the general absurdities of this latest argument, this might prove problematic for this and her other arguments:

At the time, Mrs. Clinton, who had just been elected to the Senate, said, “I believe strongly that in a democracy, we should respect the will of the people and to me, that means it’s time to do away with the Electoral College and move to the popular election of our president.”
posted by stenseng at 12:03 PM on March 24, 2008


Why would President Obama want to share?
posted by Soliloquy at 12:05 PM on March 24, 2008


This is like that movie where Matt Damon and Ben Hoofleck are suicidal angels trying to get back into Heaven. All Obama and Hillary need to do is make McCain go into a skee-ball related coma and they're GOLDEN.
posted by 23skidoo at 12:06 PM on March 24, 2008


-- BREAKING --

Clinton advisor Mark Penn unveils unbeatable "Chewbacca defense". . .

Clinton addresses "ladies and gentlemen of this supposed party" in Scranton . . .

Wookiees, Ewoks represent "American people" and "two-foot-tall" Obama . . .

posted by gompa at 12:06 PM on March 24, 2008 [1 favorite]


Or, you know, the grown-ups can just go vote.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 12:08 PM on March 24, 2008


Here's another crazy, albeit constitutionally mandated scheme: Hillary Clinton, recognizing that she's incapable of securing her party's nomination without demoralizing her base and demolishing her mandate, could concede defeat. This would clear the way for the Democrats to unite behind their clear frontrunner and begin taking the fight to a considerably compromised, but currently recuperating, John McCain.

What's the over-under on that outcome, I wonder?
posted by felix betachat at 12:10 PM on March 24, 2008


Anybody here think Hillary would stoop so low as to run as an independent in the event she doesn't get the nomination?
posted by wabbittwax at 12:12 PM on March 24, 2008


I remember reading a blog (linked here once) that said if Hillary was elected, she'd make Bill her Vice President and immediately resign.
posted by Citizen Premier at 12:12 PM on March 24, 2008


Anybody here think Hillary would stoop so low as to run as an independent in the event she doesn't get the nomination?

No, but if she did she'd win my vote.
posted by Citizen Premier at 12:13 PM on March 24, 2008


As astoundingly obvious to me that MY candidate is much better, the supporters of the OTHER candidate seem to disagree.

I think one of the really valuable notions in this whole campaign has been the need to move past previous characterizations and stereotypes... to again approach... well, so much of our political life as Americans first, partisans after.

I mean, the established systems are breaking down consistently... whoever the Democratic candidate is, they'll face a much tougher road in the general election because of the divisiveness of the primary (for example). It's clearly time for something new.
posted by emmet at 12:14 PM on March 24, 2008


Citizen Premier writes "I remember reading a blog (linked here once) that said if Hillary was elected, she'd make Bill her Vice President and immediately resign."

Well, I once heard a guy say these crazy things ...

This won't work for two reasons. First, she can't win and then decide who her running mate is. Second, even if the constitution allows Bill to do that, I doubt that many people would be happy with a coup-style reascension of Bill Clinton.
posted by krinklyfig at 12:29 PM on March 24, 2008


That was a kind of funny column, and just reaffirms that the punditocracy has, when it comes to the primary, simply run out of things to talk about. Not that they had much to say to begin with.
posted by LooseFilter at 12:29 PM on March 24, 2008


You gotta be effin kiddin me.
posted by cashman at 12:30 PM on March 24, 2008


Why choose, if you can combine?
posted by ericb at 12:30 PM on March 24, 2008 [1 favorite]


Speaking as someone who normally loves what-ifs and crazy mental exercises and constitutional arcana (US or otherwise), this would have been a mildly fun thought to entertain for a few seconds in mid-January. At this point in time it's just very, very silly.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 12:33 PM on March 24, 2008


Problem is, who would play Condi and who would play Cheney?
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 12:38 PM on March 24, 2008


This won't work for two reasons. First, she can't win and then decide who her running mate is. Second, even if the constitution allows Bill to do that, I doubt that many people would be happy with a coup-style reascension of Bill Clinton.

In order to be vice president, you need to be eligible to be president. Bill Clinton, having served two terms is ineligible to be president and thus can't be vice president.

Also, while presidents can replace their VPs, the new VP has to be confirmed by the senate if they're not elected directly. I somehow doubt that Bill would not be filibustered by the republicans.

Anyway, I don't even want to see Hillary as VP, frankly. How about Richardson?
posted by delmoi at 12:42 PM on March 24, 2008


« Older Three new online magazines - Triple Canopy, Issue ...  |  Live from her minivan, it’s Th... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments