snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Urban Legends > Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 02 February 2008, 01:39 AM
Chloe's Avatar
Chloe Chloe is offline
 
Join Date: 13 September 2004
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 39,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Towknie View Post
I actually read it as a way to put the Clintons in the White House for 12 years instead of 8. By Bill naming Hillary as his vice president, he could resign on his last day, and she could run in '12 as the incumbent with two terms of eligibility. Of course, if she were elected in '08, I guess she couldn't be elected twice more, could she?
Who would vote for her after she'd betrayed the process by resigning once?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02 February 2008, 01:41 AM
A Turtle Named Mack's Avatar
A Turtle Named Mack A Turtle Named Mack is offline
 
Join Date: 21 June 2007
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 21,451
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Four Kitties View Post
Where in the Constitution does it say that?
My bad. It is a practical limitation imposed by the Twelfth Amendment, but not a hard and fast rule. Here is the ciritcal language of the Twelfth Amendment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12th Amendment, U.S. Const., para. 1
The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate
So if the Pres. and VP both come from the same state, the electors from that state would be unable to vote for one of them, presumably the VP. In most cases it would not matter, but if Cheney had remained a Texan, he would not have had enough electoral votes to be selected by the electoral college (the thought breaks your heart, I'm sure), and the election would have been thrown to the Senate. It's a result that any party would devoutly wish to avoid.


As for Washingon and Jefferson, Adams was the VP during Washington's terms.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02 February 2008, 01:44 AM
Four Kitties's Avatar
Four Kitties Four Kitties is offline
snopes minion
 
Join Date: 29 July 2003
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 23,828
Hello Kitty

Quote:
Originally Posted by A Turtle Named Mack View Post
As for Washingon and Jefferson, Adams was the VP during Washington's terms.
Yeah, I caught that right after I posted it. :o
__________________
“The path to true enlightenment is the ability to formulate and express one's own thoughts, and not somebody else's.” -- Auntie Witch
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02 February 2008, 01:52 AM
A Turtle Named Mack's Avatar
A Turtle Named Mack A Turtle Named Mack is offline
 
Join Date: 21 June 2007
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 21,451
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Four Kitties View Post
Yeah, I caught that right after I posted it. :o
And shame on you, being from Massachusetts, not remembering Adams!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02 February 2008, 01:55 AM
keokuk's Avatar
keokuk keokuk is offline
 
Join Date: 25 July 2006
Location: Montclair, NJ
Posts: 4,233
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by snopes View Post
Didn't we pass a law prohibiting the President from appointing family members to office (because some people were disgruntled that Kennedy made his brother Attorney General)? Or did that only apply to cabinet positions?
Technically it wouldn't cover the vice presidency. It's covered in Section 3110 of Title 5 of the United States Code.

The restriction only prevents a public official (including the president) from appointing "to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official."

Despite the way that it actually operates, the vice president is technically not subordinate to the president. The Vice Presidency is its own independent office, unlike a cabinet member, who can be fired at will. Since the family member would not be "in the agency which [the president] is serving" or "over which [the president] exercises jurisdiction, it would not violate the law to appoint a family member to the vice presidency.

Last edited by keokuk; 02 February 2008 at 01:58 AM. Reason: Wrong U.S.C. title
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02 February 2008, 02:01 AM
E. Q. Taft's Avatar
E. Q. Taft E. Q. Taft is offline
 
Join Date: 30 July 2003
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 14,239
Default

Law is what the Supreme Court says it is. Anyone think that the current Supreme Court, which would have to rule on the Constitutionality of Bill's eligibility for VP, would rule in his favor? I don't.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 02 February 2008, 02:11 AM
Four Kitties's Avatar
Four Kitties Four Kitties is offline
snopes minion
 
Join Date: 29 July 2003
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 23,828
Hello Kitty

Quote:
Originally Posted by A Turtle Named Mack View Post
And shame on you, being from Massachusetts, not remembering Adams!
Yeah, I thought of that, too.

Please don't tell my mother!
__________________
“The path to true enlightenment is the ability to formulate and express one's own thoughts, and not somebody else's.” -- Auntie Witch
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 02 February 2008, 05:29 AM
Doug4.7
 
Posts: n/a
Ponder

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryda Wong, EBfCo. View Post
Cause she's a woman, and women just don't want to be in control. They want to be submissive to their husbands. It's just natural and right.
Yea, that's what I was thinking....

That or maybe she wanted to try that healthcare thing again...
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02 February 2008, 05:39 AM
mags's Avatar
mags mags is offline
 
Join Date: 23 February 2006
Location: Springboro, OH
Posts: 5,104
Default

I don't know why anyone who is afraid of a Clinton in office would find it more of a nightmare to have Bill Clinton back than to have a woman for president.

In fact, when Bill Clinton was president, most of the complaints I personally heard about his presidency were actually snide comments about Hillary controlling him.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02 February 2008, 11:46 AM
nancyfancypants's Avatar
nancyfancypants nancyfancypants is offline
 
Join Date: 27 July 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, PA area
Posts: 1,717
Default

Oh, dear - bad thought: Would the media start calling it "Billary"?
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 02 February 2008, 05:00 PM
Arriah's Avatar
Arriah Arriah is offline
 
Join Date: 15 August 2005
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 3,663
Fright

I'm pretty sure I saw that name conglomeration the other day. We're doomed aren't we?

ETA: Here is one example but I found plenty of others.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 03 February 2008, 05:53 AM
KingDavid8 KingDavid8 is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2000
Location: Lansing, MI
Posts: 4,126
Default

I have a co-worker who is 19 years old, and he commented that if Hillary is elected President and serves both terms, then by the time he is 27, he will never in his life have had a President whose last name wasn't "Bush" or "Clinton".

David
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 03 February 2008, 04:54 PM
Chloe's Avatar
Chloe Chloe is offline
 
Join Date: 13 September 2004
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 39,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingDavid8 View Post
I have a co-worker who is 19 years old, and he commented that if Hillary is elected President and serves both terms, then by the time he is 27, he will never in his life have had a President whose last name wasn't "Bush" or "Clinton".

David
Would it help if she went back to her maiden name?
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 03 February 2008, 08:32 PM
rujasu rujasu is offline
 
Join Date: 07 May 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,811
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe View Post
Would it help if she went back to her maiden name?
Actually, I think it's a legitimate concern. It bothers me that the US president for the last 20 years has come from one of two families, and that trend could continue. Certainly there are bigger issues, but it seems to go against the intent of our political system.

I'm not saying it's an issue that should factor into the election... but I also don't see how it's relevant whether she goes back to her maiden name; that's not really what's troubling.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 03 February 2008, 08:47 PM
keokuk's Avatar
keokuk keokuk is offline
 
Join Date: 25 July 2006
Location: Montclair, NJ
Posts: 4,233
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rujasu View Post
Actually, I think it's a legitimate concern. It bothers me that the US president for the last 20 years has come from one of two families, and that trend could continue. Certainly there are bigger issues, but it seems to go against the intent of our political system.

I'm not saying it's an issue that should factor into the election... but I also don't see how it's relevant whether she goes back to her maiden name; that's not really what's troubling.
It would be more of an issue for me if they were able to just stroll into office. Bush 43 had to run two very competitive general elections to get into office, Clinton faced competitive general elections in addition to the primaries in 1992, and Bush 41 faced some early primary trouble as well. Right now, Clinton is far from a lock for even getting her party's nomination.

It would bother me if the families were able to control the presidency by virtue of being those families, but it seems to me that a thriving democracy is not necessary inconsistent with having two families maintain control for an extended period of time.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 03 February 2008, 08:51 PM
Tarquin Farquart's Avatar
Tarquin Farquart Tarquin Farquart is offline
 
Join Date: 20 November 2005
Location: London, UK
Posts: 16,354
Default

All this resigned on the first day then the VP taking over then resigning again... wouldn't it be easier to set up a dictatorship?
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 03 February 2008, 08:54 PM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 109,650
United States

Quote:
It bothers me that the US president for the last 20 years has come from one of two families, and that trend could continue. Certainly there are bigger issues, but it seems to go against the intent of our political system.
If it were against the intent of our political system, then the people who created it would have put some mechanism in place to prevent it. But even the fact that our 2nd and 6th presidents were father and son didn't spur them to do so.

- snopes
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 04 February 2008, 06:16 AM
HoneyBunchingOats
 
Posts: n/a
Icon204 22nd admendment loopholes

If this is true then George W. Bush can run as the Rep. VP nominee. I personnaly think that Clinton's campaign is a loophole in the 22nd admendment. At least W. rebelled against what his father stood for...i.e. a stable Middle East by keeping Saddam contained.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 04 February 2008, 07:48 PM
JHHS1981
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingDavid8 View Post
I have a co-worker who is 19 years old, and he commented that if Hillary is elected President and serves both terms, then by the time he is 27, he will never in his life have had a President whose last name wasn't "Bush" or "Clinton".

David
You could even go back another 8 years if you say Clinton or Bush as POTUS OR VP.

So anyone born after Jan '81 has never had a time when one of the families wasn't in one of the top offices.

Think about this everyone born in 1959 or after has never voted in a Presidential election without a Bush or Clinton on the ticket.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 04 February 2008, 08:05 PM
Four Kitties's Avatar
Four Kitties Four Kitties is offline
snopes minion
 
Join Date: 29 July 2003
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 23,828
Hello Kitty

And no one in Massachusetts born in 1953 or later has ever not had a Kennedy for a Senator except for 1960-62. So what?

If we didn't want them there, we wouldn't keep electing them.

Four Kitties
__________________
“The path to true enlightenment is the ability to formulate and express one's own thoughts, and not somebody else's.” -- Auntie Witch
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.