Biden stepping down - now what? (2 Viewers)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
    Taurus said:
    Why do you think that is?

    Dems have had the raw power to make DC a state for those purposes, but they've never even tried as far as I know.

    I'm not disagreeing, more slagging on the DNC for having no damn clue how to wield power.
    Click to expand...

    It would take a Constitutional amendment for voting representation. That won't pass because both red and blue states don't want their power diluted.
     
    faceman said:
    If Al Gore had won his own state of Tenn. He would have won the election in 2000.
    Click to expand...

    Maybe I could have phrased it better, I was specifically asking about the VPs and the states that they were from. And if/maybe they had any potential sway [from the state they were from] that they might have during elections.

    For example Gore chose Joe Lieberman as VP, who was from CT (and they had won that state).

    Obama chose Biden, who was from DE, and they won that state... and so on

    ^ and this all goes back to those states previously mentioned (AZ, NC, PA) and whether it might be a strategic move to choose a VP from there.
     
    zztop said:
    Maybe I could have phrased it better, I was specifically asking about the VPs and the states that they were from. And if/maybe they had any potential sway [from the state they were from] that they might have during elections.

    For example Gore chose Joe Lieberman as VP, who was from CT (and they had won that state).

    Obama chose Biden, who was from DE, and they won that state... and so on

    ^ and this all goes back to those states previously mentioned (AZ, NC, PA) and whether it might be a strategic move to choose a VP from there.
    Click to expand...
    Agreed Here. Trumps selection pandered to his base. Vance is not going to sway many Independents or moderates.
     
    B4YOU said:
    It would take a Constitutional amendment for voting representation. That won't pass because both red and blue states don't want their power diluted.
    Click to expand...
    No it wouldn't. The Constitution calls for a neutral land to serve as the seat of government. They simply need to reset the boundaries of the District to accomplish this. That can be easily accomplished.

    1000002191.png


    The only problem I could possibly see, if any, is if there's argument that the land that is DC came from Maryland and Virginia and they want it back.
     
    Last edited:
    GrandAdmiral said:
    No it wouldn't. The Constitution calls for a neutral land to serve as the seat of government. They simply need to reset the boundaries of the District to accomplish this. That can be easily accomplished.

    1000002191.png


    The only problem I could possibly see, if any, is if there's argument that the land that is DC came from Maryland and Virginia and they want it back.
    Click to expand...

    I think the 23rd amendment will create enough problems that the current SC would block statehood attempts.

    If you shrink the District to contiguous federal buildings, then theoretically the President and their spouse/children get 3 electoral votes unto themselves. The argument can also be made that the District’s size was fixed by the 23rd which occurred after receding NoVa.
     
    B4YOU said:
    I think the 23rd amendment will create enough problems that the current SC would block statehood attempts.

    If you shrink the District to contiguous federal buildings, then theoretically the President and their spouse/children get 3 electoral votes unto themselves. The argument can also be made that the District’s size was fixed by the 23rd which occurred after receding NoVa.
    Click to expand...
    Nope. The president and family don't vote in the District. They vote in their home state (Trump traveled to Florida to vote in 2020).

    Plus, neither Article/Amendment establish a minimum size.
     
    GrandAdmiral said:
    Nope. The president and family don't vote in the District. They vote in their home state (Trump traveled to Florida to vote in 2020).

    Plus, neither Article/Amendment establish a minimum size.
    Click to expand...

    Is there any law preventing a President or their family from claiming DC residency post election?

    Legislators are bound to their state (be an inhabitant) in Article 1, but the president has no such bounds in Article 2.

    I still see a SC that doesn’t allow Congress to create a state out of the existing District due to the problems it creates and reading into the 23rd as the 3 EC votes setting the existing boundaries.
     
    Cuba is almost a failed state these days.

    We could finally solve our largest geographical weakpoint and make Cuba a state.
     
    B4YOU said:
    Is there any law preventing a President or their family from claiming DC residency post election?

    Legislators are bound to their state (be an inhabitant) in Article 1, but the president has no such bounds in Article 2.

    I still see a SC that doesn’t allow Congress to create a state out of the existing District due to the problems it creates and reading into the 23rd as the 3 EC votes setting the existing boundaries.
    Click to expand...
    Residency where? The proposed boundaries don't include residence. The White House can't be listed as the official domicile.

    Three electoral votes is not set in stone. It says the district can't have more than the state with the least amount. But if the voting population is zero, then there's no electoral votes.
     
    B4YOU said:
    Is there any law preventing a President or their family from claiming DC residency post election?

    Legislators are bound to their state (be an inhabitant) in Article 1, but the president has no such bounds in Article 2.

    I still see a SC that doesn’t allow Congress to create a state out of the existing District due to the problems it creates and reading into the 23rd as the 3 EC votes setting the existing boundaries.
    Click to expand...

    I see a SC that will figure out a way to deny Dems any kind of electoral advantage whatsoever, regardless of how perfectly legal it is.
     
    So the trump campaign has apparently sent letters to the TV networks demanding equal time tonight because they claim Biden's speech tonight is a political speech for Harris.

    :biglol:
     
    MT15 said:
    Why not Puerto Rico before Cuba?
    Click to expand...
    Both would be very expensive for the U.S. Treasury. This is one of those issues where the fiscal conservative
    comes out in me. I'd vote no.

    www.pr51st.com

    Puerto Rico Statehood: Pros and Cons | Puerto Rico 51st

    The advantages of statehood for Puerto Rico are obvious: The sometimes bizarre legal inequalities between Puerto Rico and the states would end, immediately helping Puerto Rico’s economy. For example, Puerto Rico would be eligible for D-SNAP, the special food stamp program for disaster victims...
    www.pr51st.com www.pr51st.com
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom