One of the scenarios that is being discussed, regarding the Democratic Party and the Presidential Election of 2020, is that former Vice President Joe Biden and former Texas Congressman Beto O’Rourke might be the ticket to victory.
Biden remains in the lead in many public opinion polls, and has long been admired and loved by many Americans, including this blogger. Of course, in a career of 44 years in government, some of his initiatives, including a tough crime bill, making it more difficult to declare bankruptcy, and his conduct of the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill Supreme Court hearings, undermine his appeal to many. Also, his tendency to talk too much, and in an embarrassing manner, also is not appealing to many.
On the other hand, his 36 years in the Senate, including chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Senate Foreign Relations Committee has made highly respected by many legal authorities and foreign policy specialists, as well as the leadership of many foreign nations.
Beto O’Rourke ran a very close race in Texas against Senator Ted Cruz, and has a very appealing personality, and has the added edge of looking as if he is related to the former Attorney General and US Senator Robert F. Kennedy, with whom he shares the same first and middle name. Even though he is not a Kennedy, he reminds many of the former Presidential contender who was assassinated in 1968.
However, O’Rourke has some youthful arrests that could dog him, and is seen by many as too moderate a Democrat, although one must realize he is from El Paso, Texas, not exactly a site of overly progressive heritage. Many might say he is a “Blue Dog” Democrat in his six years career in the House of Representatives, now ended.
So for Progressives who like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden and Beto O’Rourke seem too moderate and centrist, and it all comes down to whether a Sanders or a Warren could actually carry the nation, and make up for the shortcomings of Hillary Clinton in the Midwest and among white working class voters.
Biden being 78 at the time of the next inauguration is definitely a problem, but O’Rourke would be 48. It all comes down to selection of a running mate who Joe Biden would be compatible with, which in Joe’s case is not a big problem, because he gets along well with most people he has associated with, and has a record of “crossing the aisle” and working with Republicans, many of whom admire and praise him, even if they disagree on the issues.
One of the minuses for Beto – he has limited national political experience.
This time around, because of what’s happened here in Virginia, and because of Trump, I want a woman candidate. It’s time.
Princess Leia, I wish to point out that Barack Obama had only four years in the Senate, and O’Rourke has had six years in the House of Representatives.
Also, Abraham Lincoln only had two years in the House of Representatives, finished 12 years before he became President.
Who would make a good two women ticket?
Rational Lefty, that is NOT going to happen!
In theory, a Warren with a Harris is the only theoretical one I can imagine, but it will NOT happen as Harris, and really, any of the five women running, would reject being VP with a woman Presidential nominee!
Rational Lefty – I think a double-dame ticket is a bit overdue. If that ever occurs, it would be very historic.
Ronald writes, “Princess Leia, I wish to point out that Barack Obama had only four years in the Senate, and O’Rourke has had six years in the House of Representatives.â€
I wish to point out that, for president of the United States, you don’t have to have any prior experience with holding office or having served in the United States military. You don’t have to have prior experience in politics.
* * * U.S. Constitution — Article 2 Section 1 * * *
“No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.â€
Precisely, D, and Donald Trump had ZERO experience in the military or in government, although I hope that scenario NEVER happens again!
Ronald writes, “Precisely, D, and Donald Trump had ZERO experience in the military or in government, although I hope that scenario NEVER happens again!â€
It will happen again.
It should.
The point of that part of the U.S. Constitution is with the freedom to make eligibility for the presidency open to all natural born citizens who meet the age and residency requirements.
I meet the eligibility requirements. If everyone else here does … that’s nice.
This is about the country. And the country is ours. It is government by the people and for the people; not government by only those with prior experience in government positions and those who had served in a branch of the U.S. military.
This is one of the best parts of the U.S. Constitution.
D, I respectfully totally disagree!
The experience of Donald Trump and the threat of Howard Schultz is enough evidence to state that EXPERIENCE is important, and knowledge and expertise is crucial!
Even though no fan of Mitt Romney or Michael Bloomberg, they had business careers and then served as Governor of Massachusetts and Mayor of New York City, and those experiences were and are important!
To me, the idea of anyone, of course who has lots of money, looking at government as a financial windfall and thinking it is a business, when it most certainly is NOT that, is a total misunderstanding of how government operates!
Would one go to a doctor, attorney, accountant, engineer, etc. who did not have experience and the proper credentials?
The answer is NO, and government leadership at the Presidential level should only be for those who have been in government, and or the military, although I think the military alone is NOT enough!
So are you, D, technically qualified for the Presidency? Yes and so am I, but I would not have the arrogance or ego to think I am qualified to run a nation in a difficult world!
The difference is that Obama was knowledgeable about government and world affairs. Trump shows he is ignorant about such things. Most Americans do not want someone who is ignorant running the country.
Ronald,
The presidency of the United States—the eligibility for it—is not about the words “experience,†“credentials,†or being “qualified.â€
Those are optional. They are options for what a voter feels is needed a U.S. president. Every voter gets to handle his voting and determine, if one will, that a president of the United States needs any or all of that—and possibly more.
When it comes to eligibility, the U.S. Constitution has it mostly right. Where it is wrong is with its bias in citing an age that is well past the legally recognized age of when one reaches becoming an adult. But, overall, it recognizes that the president of the Untied States is the Leader of the Free World.
A Free World—and the United States of America—cannot be free if it were to require presidents of the United States to have prior experience with holding political office and/or having served in the U.S. military just for the sake of acquiring the credentials that, as it would seem, may make them qualified.
D, I am really enjoying our back and forth here lol! 🙂
It may not state that in the Constitution, but we were smart enough not to let a crooked con artist come to power until now, and look at the mess we are in!
I do NOT think anyone over the minimum age of voting–18–is qualified to be President, and I do not think Ocasio Cortez at 29 is qualified, just as an example!
My grandfather used to say that a person is not mature and settled until at least 35, and even that age is questionable, as I believe age 40 should be the limit!
So we agree to disagree, haha, and I just hope a reprise of a Donald Trump type does not arise again, because if it does, then our whole system of government will be destroyed!
The thing that concerns most people about having a president who is 80 is age related issues such as dementia.
Ronald,
You keep using the word “qualified.â€
The presidency is not about being qualified.
The presidency of the United States is about, for the most part, freedom. That freedom includes the possibility—not probability; but possibility—that every person in the United States, who meets the eligibility requirements of the U.S. Constitution, can be president of the United States.
This, as someone who does meet the eligibility requirements, and even when I did not (because I was not of age), is what I understand, support, and appreciate.
I treat the Constitution as a living document.
If you go strictly by the Constitution, at the time of the Founders, women and people of color would not have been able to be president.
That’s why I’m strongly against the GOP’s efforts to strip away rights from women and people of color.
With Trump’s diet of junk food and lack of exercise, I’m surprised he hasn’t suffered a stroke or heart attack yet.
While it’s not in the Constitution, many people feel that a good leader must demonstrate such qualities as competence, integrity, empathy, character and temperament. Trump does not have these essential qualities.
Got another candidate in the race. His main focus is climate change.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/01/politics/inslee-2020-presidential-campaign/index.html
Yet another candidate in the race.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/04/politics/john-hickenlooper-presidential-campaign/index.html
Hillary and Bloomberg have decided not to run.