Could a Republican and a Democrat work as President and Vice President of the Un

1. 74

   pagesvoiceposted 11 years ago

   Could a Republican and a Democrat work as President and Vice President of the United States?
   
   With so much divisiveness in the United States, would the country become more united if we had a Democrat and a Republican or a Republican and a Democrat as President and Vice President? Currently I think Andrew Cuomo (Governor of New York) and Chris Christie (Governor of New Jersey) would make a dynamic duo. In other words, is it time to stop the petty party bickering and finally start working toward the common good of the country?

   replyreport
2. 0

   ahorsebackposted 11 years ago

   Agreed !  Yet  I thing a two person Presidency might be better . Equal chairs  , equal power !

   replyreport
   1. 71

      ImKarn23posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Not surprised you agree, Ed! Smart Cowboy that you are...

      replyreport
   2. 74

      pagesvoiceposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      In theory your idea sounds great, but alas, I will most certainly not live long enough to witness that kind of a compromise.

      replyreport
3. 71

   ImKarn23posted 11 years ago

   Good morning Dennis! I think it's a fabulous idea - and i believe that somewhere in US history - it's been done, yes?
   it would solve sooo many problems - and probably create a few at first as well - but - maybe some shit would get done round here!
   The wheels of government have all but ground to a complete stop - it's absolutely frightening how long it takes to get some innocuous bill passed!
   I don't understand the complacency of the people either - i fear it's because they are stressed and exhausted - scrambling just to make ends meet - that they can't focus on issues that might otherwise galvanize them into action!
   Please D - i am begging you to write something about gun control - and share mine and others you find! We HAVE to keep it alive and spreading before it gets SHOT down...Gabby Gifford is starting a new push - AND - the newtown families are also making it their mission to get gun controls in place! (I REALLY would LOVE to know how many of them were nra types previous to this tragedy...sigh...)The white house is also gearing up - BUT - i wonder why they must meet with the NRA next week? It's not like the nra is gonna 'give' at all, SOOOOOO - wtf, D? What's being exchanged, bought,  sold at next weeks meeting? This makes me fear that obama will NOT grow a pair of balls and do what must be done! He's gonna bandaid it - instead of making it his legacy..
   i hope i'm wrong!
   Anyways.....Yes - i believe a president and vice pres from different parties is an excellent idea!

   replyreport
   1. 74

      pagesvoiceposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      You are correct about complacency with people. We've transformed into a world of snippets of data, with no depth. I've written Washington, my Senator and signed petitions Re: stricter gun laws that are sensible. I've shared your articles as well.

      replyreport
   2. 71

      ImKarn23posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Woo Hoo...I'd like to thank the Academy...LOL..

      replyreport
4. 0

   Old Empresarioposted 11 years ago

   That's a brilliant idea (precisely why it was in the original un-amendend Constitution). It would end the blaming of the old regime in order to get a new president elected of the opposite party. Too many political insiders would lose out if this happened and it would give too much of their secret little game away.

   replyreport
   1. 74

      pagesvoiceposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Excellent answer Old Empresario. You are correct in your analogy about other politicians losing out on the brass ring. Lobbyists would be scratching their heads in total confusion.

      replyreport
5. 63

   snapbackbettyposted 11 years ago

   I agree. The bickering needs to stop. I think both parties would probably do better in office. There would be different view points to put together that could make things better for everyone.

   replyreport
   1. 74

      pagesvoiceposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      We have become so little minded in our partisan politics with an attitude of "my way or the highway." It is nonsensical rhetoric filled with false pretenses. We need to put "United" back into the USA.

      replyreport
   2. 63

      snapbackbettyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I agree

      replyreport
6. 71

   Prakash Digheposted 11 years ago

   I think its a great idea. At the moment though, the Republican party appears to be fraught with divisions within their own ranks. They need to first get their house in order before their candidate has a chance to make this arrangement work.

   replyreport
7. 61

   fpherj48posted 11 years ago

   Dennis......I've thought about this a few times.  In fact, I remember asking my husband what he thought....and if it was even a possibility.  I don't see why it couldn't happen.   I like Ed's comment about TWO Presidents, one from each party.....and instead of Vice Presidents, we can elect two Referees!
   I'm at the point of thinking that anything might prove to be better and more productive than the current system.
   I happen to like both of the men you mention.....Andrew is our NY man and I've always liked Christie.  You do realize they are both incredibly strong, forceful & aggressive personalities, I'm sure.  ..but, that would be a dynamic duo.  As long as they didn't kill each other within the first month.  Makes the referee idea fairly sensible, don't you think?

   replyreport
   1. 74

      pagesvoiceposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I totally agree with your assessment. As a matter of fact, I am currently watching Cuomo's State of the State Address. He has a great common sense approach to things.

      replyreport
8. 72

   tngolfplayerposted 11 years ago

   I think if the people that are the POTUS and VP are genuinely good people interested in helping the people, it could work.  However the reality is each party thinks they are right, and think their way is the only way, so its doubtful it could work.  Which is sad, because they bicker, we suffer.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      fpherj48posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Right..I know.  They tell us to "unite, work together, be in unison, for the good of our country"...while they duke it out 24/7....and can't come to an agreement about anything. lovely!

      replyreport
9. 0

   Larry Wallposted 11 years ago

   This has been tried and while it sounds good on paper, it probably would not work in this era of time. The powers of the Vice President are limited and it is pretty much left up to the President to determine what the Vice President will be doing while in office.
   
   As the comment from http://wiki.answers.com which I have pasted below, it has happened several times. I remember from my college history classes, when being President did not involve a lot of international or major decisions that the Electoral College elected the President and VP from different parties. As the explanation below notes it would be much more difficult to accomplish under the present law.
   Furthermore, with the ever growing gap between the two parties, I do not think it would work. I agree something needs to be done. I do not have the ultimate solution. I do know that it is probably more important that the two parties in Congress start spending more days in Washington looking for common ground and learning how to play in the same sandbox if you will. Party leaders used to be friendly toward each other and did work together. That is not the case today.
   
   The Wiki Com comment is pasted below.
   
   It has happened many times that the P and VP have been of different parties, for example, Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr, but, the possibility of this occurring has narrowed since the Twelfth Amendment stating that the P and VP should run for election on a "Joint Ticket". In theory it could still happen today due to the fact that in the Electoral College each "elector" votes for both a P and a VP, Faithless electors could simply vote for a P of one party and a VP of another President (however, many would be punished by state law). However, they could also abstain from voting for the VP which would allow the other Vice Presidential nominee to have more votes. An example of a Rouge or Faithless elector is in 2000, when Barbara Simmons refused to vote for Al Gore and Joe Lieberman as she pledged to do so, she did this so people would take notice of Washington DC's lack of representation.
   http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Ever_been_pre … nt_parties

   replyreport
   1. 74

      pagesvoiceposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you Larry for your in depth response. It's sad watching our country deteriorate due to partisan politics. Ted Kennedy was a prime example of how to reach across the aisle, but those days seem gone.

      replyreport