Bucky wrote:following with falatistic bemusement a FB thread on one of the vintage philadelphia pages talking about rizzo. Lots and lots of folks still revere him.

I'm guessing that those folks also make up the Rump base.

Vegas wouldn't even put up a line

Who will be Hillary's running mate?

http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/ ... ids=653892

Democrat Vice Presidential Candidate
Julian Castro 2/1
Sherrod Brown 12/1
John Kerry 25/1
Elizabeth Warren 5/1
John Hickenlooper 14/1
Martin O'Malley 8/1
Joe Biden 16/1
Ron Wyden 40/1
Evan Bayh 10/1
Brian Schweitzer 16/1
Bill Clinton 66/1
Tim Kaine 12/1
Bernie Sanders 16/1
Anna Wintour 100/1
Cory Booker 12/1

Mississippi is keeping the Confederate battle flag on its state flag

i would hope she wouldnt pick castro. dont want his star to burn out being vp.

TomatoPie wrote:Who will be Hillary's running mate?

http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/ ... ids=653892

I'd ask you to ship me some of whatever the individual who composed that list is ingesting but it is almost certainly a violation of federal law for you to do so

pacino wrote:Mississippi is keeping the Confederate battle flag on its state flag

herr'tige

drsmooth wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:Who will be Hillary's running mate?

http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/ ... ids=653892

I'd ask you to ship me some of whatever the individual who composed that list is ingesting but it is almost certainly a violation of federal law for you to do so

Thems the overseas betting odds. I figure the odds are set on how bettors want to bet, moreso than any oddsmaker wisdom or lack of wisdom

if the clintons are nothing else they are most definitely politically savvy. the hypothetical running mate (cause Bernie gonna win) would be a white male.

JFLNYC wrote:What are they going to do? They're not voting for Hillary. They may as well get behind him and try to work with him even if they can't control him.

It's not a matter of voting, it's whether Cruz can count on establishment support. Remember, party elites don't really care about winning or losing elections, and I suspect that for many of the right wing interest groups, a Hillary win is much healthier for the bottom line anyway. Fox News, the NRA, and their ilk have profited greatly from eight years of Obama.

TomatoPie wrote:Who will be Hillary's running mate?

http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/ ... ids=653892

Democrat Vice Presidential Candidate
Julian Castro 2/1
Sherrod Brown 12/1
John Kerry 25/1
Elizabeth Warren 5/1
John Hickenlooper 14/1
Martin O'Malley 8/1
Joe Biden 16/1
Ron Wyden 40/1
Evan Bayh 10/1
Brian Schweitzer 16/1
Bill Clinton 66/1
Tim Kaine 12/1
Bernie Sanders 16/1
Anna Wintour 100/1
Cory Booker 12/1

Bill is ineligible so that is a dumb bet.

When I saw Bill in these odds, I investigated. There is some debate as to whether he could be on the ticket. I doubt Hillary would a) want to stir up that kind of controversy and b) even want to look at him that often to have him as a running mate.

TenuredVulture wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:What are they going to do? They're not voting for Hillary. They may as well get behind him and try to work with him even if they can't control him.

It's not a matter of voting, it's whether Cruz can count on establishment support. Remember, party elites don't really care about winning or losing elections, and I suspect that for many of the right wing interest groups, a Hillary win is much healthier for the bottom line anyway. Fox News, the NRA, and their ilk have profited greatly from eight years of Obama.

Sounds like Hinkie is calling the shots. Seriously, though, I can't agree that the party elites don't care about winning or losing. They do what their masters (i.e., the donors) tell them and those donors care very much about winning. Losing is not good for *their* bottom line and there's no way they're pouring hundreds of millions into the Republican campaigns while indifferent to the outcome.

TomatoPie wrote:Thems the overseas betting odds. I figure the odds are set on how bettors want to bet, moreso than any oddsmaker wisdom or lack of wisdom

Yes. They saw names in the papers, they threw them on a list, people "cast votes"

stevemc wrote:When I saw Bill in these odds, I investigated. There is some debate as to whether he could be on the ticket. I doubt Hillary would a) want to stir up that kind of controversy and b) even want to look at him that often to have him as a running mate.

I thought Hillary said he cannot be because if she were to die or whatever he could not become President since he already served his two terms. Probably a gray area.

heyeaglefn wrote:

stevemc wrote:When I saw Bill in these odds, I investigated. There is some debate as to whether he could be on the ticket. I doubt Hillary would a) want to stir up that kind of controversy and b) even want to look at him that often to have him as a running mate.

I thought Hillary said he cannot be because if she were to die or whatever he could not become President since he already served his two terms. Probably a gray area.

She has already commented on it saying it would be unconstitutional.

JFLNYC wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:What are they going to do? They're not voting for Hillary. They may as well get behind him and try to work with him even if they can't control him.

It's not a matter of voting, it's whether Cruz can count on establishment support. Remember, party elites don't really care about winning or losing elections, and I suspect that for many of the right wing interest groups, a Hillary win is much healthier for the bottom line anyway. Fox News, the NRA, and their ilk have profited greatly from eight years of Obama.

Sounds like Hinkie is calling the shots. Seriously, though, I can't agree that the party elites don't care about winning or losing. They do what their masters (i.e., the donors) tell them and those donors care very much about winning. Losing is not good for *their* bottom line and there's no way they're pouring hundreds of millions into the Republican campaigns while indifferent to the outcome.

As long as they have the house, they can keep the deferred interest income tax cut or whatever it is.

In fact, money people probably have the least at stake in political outcomes. I suppose some might get a bit twitchy with a Pres Sanders or something like that, but these people know how to work the rules to their own advantage. It's sort of like Alabama in college football--pay players, don't pay players, 4 team tournament, BCS, 8 team tournament--none of it matters, Bama will find a way to be a perennial contender.

to the purity crowd: Elizabeth Warren used to be a Republican

fyi

momadance wrote:

heyeaglefn wrote:

stevemc wrote:When I saw Bill in these odds, I investigated. There is some debate as to whether he could be on the ticket. I doubt Hillary would a) want to stir up that kind of controversy and b) even want to look at him that often to have him as a running mate.

I thought Hillary said he cannot be because if she were to die or whatever he could not become President since he already served his two terms. Probably a gray area.

She has already commented on it saying it would be unconstitutional.

I am no Constitutional scholar BUT the 22nd Amendment specifies that "no person shall be elected to the office of President more than twice...". Nonetheless, read this bit on Wiki:

There is a point of contention regarding the interpretation of the Twenty-second Amendment as it relates to the Twelfth Amendment, ratified in 1804, which provides that "no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice President of the United States."

While it is clear that under the Twelfth Amendment the original constitutional qualifications of age, citizenship, and residency apply to both the President and Vice President, it is unclear whether a two-term president could later serve as Vice President. Some argue that the Twenty-second Amendment and Twelfth Amendment bar any two-term president from later serving as Vice President as well as from succeeding to the presidency from any point in the United States presidential line of succession. Others contend that the Twelfth Amendment concerns qualification for service, while the Twenty-second Amendment concerns qualifications for election, and thus a former two-term president is still eligible to serve as vice president. The practical applicability of this distinction has not been tested, as no former president has ever sought the vice presidency. During Hillary Clinton's 2016 candidacy, she said that she had considered naming Bill Clinton as her Vice President, but had been advised it would be unconstitutional.

traderdave wrote:

momadance wrote:

heyeaglefn wrote:

stevemc wrote:When I saw Bill in these odds, I investigated. There is some debate as to whether he could be on the ticket. I doubt Hillary would a) want to stir up that kind of controversy and b) even want to look at him that often to have him as a running mate.

I thought Hillary said he cannot be because if she were to die or whatever he could not become President since he already served his two terms. Probably a gray area.

She has already commented on it saying it would be unconstitutional.

I am no Constitutional scholar BUT the 22nd Amendment specifies that "no person shall be elected to the office of President more than twice...". Nonetheless, read this bit on Wiki:

There is a point of contention regarding the interpretation of the Twenty-second Amendment as it relates to the Twelfth Amendment, ratified in 1804, which provides that "no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice President of the United States."

While it is clear that under the Twelfth Amendment the original constitutional qualifications of age, citizenship, and residency apply to both the President and Vice President, it is unclear whether a two-term president could later serve as Vice President. Some argue that the Twenty-second Amendment and Twelfth Amendment bar any two-term president from later serving as Vice President as well as from succeeding to the presidency from any point in the United States presidential line of succession. Others contend that the Twelfth Amendment concerns qualification for service, while the Twenty-second Amendment concerns qualifications for election, and thus a former two-term president is still eligible to serve as vice president. The practical applicability of this distinction has not been tested, as no former president has ever sought the vice presidency. During Hillary Clinton's 2016 candidacy, she said that she had considered naming Bill Clinton as her Vice President, but had been advised it would be unconstitutional.

And the argument is he's still being elected since you vote for a VP on the ticket. The last sentence of the12th Amendment explicitly states that no one can become VP if they are ineligible to be President.

yeah, he's not eligible. Any attempt around that is weaselish.