Skip to comments.How to bring back Bill - Clinton-Clinton 2008 ticket is possible
Posted on 06/12/2006 3:28:21 PM PDT by HAL9000
How to bring back Bill
A Clinton-Clinton 2008 ticket is constitutionally possible.
WASHINGTON, D.C., AND MADISON, N.J. Americans are nostalgic for the 1990s. They long for a time when terrorism was perceived as a problem confined to foreign lands and when the stock market's rise seemed unstoppable. And, it turns out, many of them miss former President Bill Clinton.
In a recent poll conducted for CNN, respondents favored Mr. Clinton over President Bush on a variety of issues, including policy areas traditionally viewed as GOP strongholds. By a wide margin, those surveyed indicated that Clinton did a better job managing the economy and handling foreign affairs and taxes.
Clinton's resurgent popularity, and Democrats' difficulties in taking over the White House in recent years, might counsel a bold strategy for 2008. Whoever is selected as the Democratic nominee for the next presidential race should consider William Jefferson Clinton as a candidate for vice president.
~ snip ~
(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...
Of course this scenario is impossible. A vice presidential candidate must be elgible to serve as president. Bill Clinton is no longer elgible to serve as president.
It might be another reason Sandy Burglar did his deed.
If it's tried, we'll have a hell of a fight to battle.
How can we miss him if he won't go away?
"Whoever is selected as the Democratic nominee for the next presidential race should consider William Jefferson Clinton as a candidate for vice president..."
This is obviously an example of pandering to fools, inasmuch as Bill Clinton would not qualify for Vice President.
This is based on precisely the kind of sophistic parsing of language that Bill Clinton trully loves. It depends on what the meaning of "is elected" is.
Stopped reading right there.
1993 Attempted Assassination of Pres. Bush Sr., April 14,1993
1993 First World Trade Center bombing, February 26th, 7 Killed, Hundreds injured, Billions
1995 Attack on US Diplomats in Pakistan, Mar 8,1995
1996 Khobar Towers attack
1998 U.S. Embassy Bombing in Peru, Jan 15, 1998
1998 U.S. Kenya Embassy blown up, 100's murdered
1998 U.S. Tanzania Embassy blown up, 100's murdered
1999 Plot to blow up Space Needle (thwarted)
2000 USS Cole attacked, many U.S. Navy sailors murdered
Anyway, I for one was tired of seeing the U.S.A. being slapped around by a bunch of piss ant thugs. That's partly why I voted for Mr. Bush in '00 and again in '04 (he said what he was going to do and he did it... no gray area, only black & white).
I don't want to see the do-nothing, take from the "rich" give to the poor, do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do limo liberals in power ever again.
Wishful thinking, but not true.
Where is the double barf alert?
Biased, Tarpit-Bound Media Reporters are nostalgic for the 1990s...
There. Fixed it.
I wish people would stop saying it's possible .. it's NOT possible.
Thank goodness for the 22nd Amendment.
I wonder if Clinton and OJ Simpson play golf
as the "jailbird duo"..laughing all overf the course...
both beat the system...the lowlifes...Jake
When are people going to realize that presidents dont "manage" the economy?!? this isnt a totalitarian state. economies do better when politicians stay out of it, and that's exactly why our economy has been doing better and better these past few years. aside from wars, tax cuts and subsidies, presidents dont have as much pull on the economy as most would like to think.
P.S. Interested in a Freeper in Congress? Keep in touch with me
Would the media have a gig if it wasn't for polling?
Not sure that's true, actually. It'd definitely be in front of the Supreme Court.
Ammendment 22 is kind of vague in this regard. It says that a person can't be elected president more than two times. An argument could be made that a person could then be elected vice president (even if it meant they could potentially inherit the presidency subsequently).
I sure wouldn't want to bet money on the courts deciding one way or another.
Actually, I believe that Bill could serve as VP (regardless of the important "should" question). If he has to serve as president, I think the speaker would overtake him.
But a condition of being "elected Vice President" is that the person CAN SERVE AS THE PRESIDENT - BILL CLINTON CANNOT!!
Good grief! Are people really that dense ..??
Please show me in the Constitution where it says this. I know it's common sense, but please show me the actual verbiage.
Good grief! Are people really that dense ..??
Yes, people really are. How else would half of the population voted for both Al Gore and John Kerry?
It appears that some people won't bother to read the Constitution before saying something?
You could put all of Bill Clinton's knowledge of economics in a G-d damn thimble and p!$$ in it and not wash any of his knowledge out. He was and is the luckiest man in the world. Period.
We ought to seek a grant to purchase a copy for each hotel room--set it beside the Gideon's.
Amendment XII, last sentence:
"But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."
As it has been, for the past five years.
Not quite up to the the myth status of the Kennedy's 'Camelot'. . .but close;
. . .and those wonderful 'Clinton Years' are still a work in progress.
[Article. XII.] [Proposed 1803; Ratified 1804] But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
Ain't gonna happen. A Clinton-Clinton ticket would get stomped into a mudhole.
In addition to the fact that he wouldn't qualify as already observed; he'd never agree to play second, uh, banana.
This is not true. Very few people want either of the Clintons back, and you can bet your last dollar they will try to crook their way to the top.
Unfortunately, I disagree. He couldn't legally be ELECTED, but nowhere does the Constitution restrict a person who has served two terms from serving a portion of another elected President's term.
But then, I'm not a Constitutional attorney and scholar, so you're probably correct and I'm wrong. I'm only reading the document for what the words say, not how they're to be interpreted.
How to Bring Back Bill
When I first read that header, my mind registered "How to Bring Back Bile"
For the former impeached, disgrased, and disbared president Bill Clinton to run again would certainly solve the serious problem facing Republicans. Even McCain could beat Clinton.
I would even be willing to switch parties so I could vote in the primaries for Clinton. Of course I would vote again for the Republican candidate. I would use a Katrina victim name and address to vote several times around the country. Think I'm kidding. I know one guy who voted 8 times in New Orleans for Ray Nagin.
Heh heh...I don't think he's of that bent either...
Constitutional or not, it would not surprise me to see a Clinton-Clinton ticket. In fact it would surprise me if we didn't. If the powers that be want the WhiteHouse to be trashed again, they couldn't pick a better team.
It's true, he is not eligible to be chosen by the Electoral College to serve as President, under the (incredibly badly drafted) XXII Amendment.
But if he were, for example, Speaker of the House and the President and Vice-President both died, there's no question that he could and would become President.
Now, I agree that Bill running for VP violates the spirit of XXII, but certainly not the letter. Inasmuch as these are the Clintons we are talking about, I assume that the spiritual violation is no problem.
And, to be realistic, if the People chose 271 electors for Vice-President who voted for him, no Court in this land would disallow it.
You wish the Constitution said that - but it doesn't.
It says Bill Clinton cannot be elected to the office of President.
A candidate for VP must be eligible to serve as President - and WJC certainly is.
Written by a shyster and a college politics teacher---"Constitution? Hell, we doan' need no constitution!"
In your dreams.
It's one of the worst drafted amendments, and it doesn't say what you think it does.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.