Let's get the brainstorming session started. Who is the best person to replace Donald Trump with only a month remaining until the election. Below is a poll with a couple of names that will be tossed around by the media with regularity. I will also add an 'other' category. Please add a short opinion on your pick. My vote goes to Gary Johnson. I know this seems an unlikely fit do to the fact he's not a neoconservative war hawk, but he is the popular alternative to the two worst candidates in recent memory. He's currently polling over 15% in New Mexico. Who else is going to come in with that type of groundswell with such a short time to establish their message. I'd also consider Pence as a possible replacement. Your thoughts?
Well this thread went nowhere. No one wants to pontificate Trump's ouster and subsequent replacement?
Maybe you should try a poll about who Hillary's replacement might be if she dies or her scandals catch up with her.
I highly doubt he will be replaced. The catch is that it's too late to change the ticket in many states due to state law. Plus even if it weren't for the law, it would be hard for a state to react this fast. In fact, some people have already voted, and will states change the ballot after people have voted? I don't think so. There has been some talk of having electors from states where Trump wins simply choose someone other than Trump in the electoral college. But, a number of states have laws against that, too. So, I think this comes down to "how", not "who". And, I don't believe there is a "how". And, if it ever got down to "who" I don't see any Republican who has been adequately vetted by the American public other than Cruz and maybe Rubio as a distant second. We certainly don't know much of anything about Pence.
The Republican party needs to die and be replaced with a nationalist party. The standard Republican model will not work anymore.
I'm not so sure about your specific proposal. But, it seems hard to imagine that the R's will remain as they are. And, with that change it could be that the Dems will change as well. My own view is that the Rs are totally misjudging the issues facing manufacturing workers today. And, becoming more "nationalist" with respect to trade is a stupendous mistake. We're 5% of the world population. The EU is larger than the US in population. US corporations sell products overseas, with many having overseas sales far ahead of US sales.
I'm not suggesting that we stop trading or even reduce trade, but we need to do it differently. One of the primary goals in any given trade deal should be to increase employment, not discourage it. If that doesn't make sense, then something has to be done about low wages and the absurdly high costs of living. Either way, the party needs to stop being the party of the rich and become the party of the middle class. When I say nationalist, I mean a party that isn't liberal but represents the needs of average people. Since we will never get rid of cronyism, it is time to embrace it for ourselves and get whatever pie we can.
The Teflon media will have the left convinced she's on vacation if dead or incarcerated. - - - Updated - - - There's a lot of chatter for Pence to join the fray. The million dollar question is will he accept. Publicly he's saying no, but I imagine he's at least thinking about it.
You mean if someone snuck into Trump Tower overnight, kidnapped Trump, and stranded him in international waters on his yacht out of gas, who would take Trump's place? Probably would be Mittens. After all, people want a businessman so badly.
Trump is not going anywhere. The latest dirt on him will be old news by monday. The Clinton folks were holding on to this one until now but it just doesn't rise to the kind of stuff she's been ducking.
Wouldn't this as a formality fall to Pence? If it's by vote they'd have to give it to Ted Cruz. But I just don't see it happening.
Trade deals have other advantages as well. They help work toward a level playing field, work against corrupt monitary practices, etc. And, US manufacturing workers face several other problems that are at least as big as trade deals - problems Clinton addresses and Trump doesn't seem to know about.
It's tricky. I know why they want TPP (to counter China), and it makes sense, but the skepticism comes from how it might be implemented more than the concept itself. Essentially, it's a good idea to create a trade bloc that follows labor standards and forces China to compete more fairly, but I'm skeptical as to whether they can get it done, and how it might morph into some other kind of monster. True, but you never know. Perhaps Rubio?
Deleting trade deals from our approach to China, leveling competition isn't a good idea. All our policy has risk. I see a number of serious challenges facing mannufacturi g workers. I like that Clinton has actual policy addressing several, and that she has become more aware of the trade issues and how to address them due to facing the challenge by Sanders.
I never said I wanted to "delete" anything, and I don't think Donald has, either. Since she is going to be president, I hope you are right. I do not like her, the party, or want her to be president, but of course I want her to do a good job.
