Who would you chooose?
My choices:
Obama - President
Ron Paul - Vice President
2007-11-02 04:10:56 · 10 answers · asked by Lisa M 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I know that is was tried before. I am asking for your choices IF that is how it is today.
2007-11-02 04:17:07 · update #1
dirtbag...If you have a crystal ball that can truthfully predict the future, could you please let me know what tonights lotto numbers will be?
2007-11-02 04:18:39 · update #2
In theory, that would be a good format, in fact it was how it used to be with the highest vote getter becoming President, the second the Vice-President.
The problem now is that there are enough wackos and too much accessibility to a means that Presidents would be getting "whacked" left and right by opposition parties.
To answer your questions...hypothetically...in history, I would have loved to see Reagan as President and Bill Clinton as Vice-President. I think those two have been the most charismatic leaders were have had. I think they would have played well together and the country would have benefited greatly from their joint leadership.
2007-11-02 04:17:18 · answer #1 · answered by Gus K 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Biden President
Huckabee Vice President
2007-11-02 11:38:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's the way things used to be. Well, not quite, but close. The winner became president, the guy who came in second became vice president. While it was an interesting tid-bit to know about, it didn't work that well at all. They were constantly arguing with each other. The vice president was technically powerless, but had tremendous popular influence that put the president in a position that he was constantly rearguing the same issues that decided the election to begin with.
If I had to make a choice, I'd go with Duncan Hunter or Mike Huckabee and Bill Richardson as VP (at least he actually knows how the executive branch is supposed to work).
2007-11-02 11:19:21 · answer #3 · answered by ima_super_geek 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
this was tried in early America and changed via amending the Constitution. Seems that the possible abrupt change in policies if the President died and the VP succeeded was scary -- as it should be.
[Think about the urge to assassainate the President in order to change the government.]
2007-11-02 11:15:00 · answer #4 · answered by Spock (rhp) 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
My choices:
President -- any Republican who says that the Bush v. Gore decision by the Supreme Court was legally preposterous and a total fiasco.
Vice President -- any Democrat who says that the Roe v. Wade decision by the Supreme Court was legally preposterous and a total fiasco.
2007-11-02 11:15:52 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
yeah it used to be that way, and if the candidates were of opposing veiws it would be the same. your picks, ron paul and obama, are the same ones I would pick, perhaps switch their position though. Their veiws correspond somewhat, so i think in that case it would work out great.
2007-11-02 11:15:25 · answer #6 · answered by Austin n 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Neither one will be elected, have you hegard the old saying, (beating a dead horse) Rooting for them is the same thing.
2007-11-02 11:17:04 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Guiliani or Thompson for president
Lieberman for VP
(remember, the Democrats already chose him for that job!)
2007-11-02 11:15:24 · answer #8 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
this was actually how things were done for an number of years in the US. it didn't work out so well.
2007-11-02 11:13:11 · answer #9 · answered by Free Radical 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I could vote for that combination.
2007-11-02 11:14:45 · answer #10 · answered by Zardoz 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋