# When will Mike Pence become the next US president?



## Taleweaver (Mar 4, 2019)

Seriously: if you have to ask what this is about, you've been living under a rock. And you can join the many discussions that somewhere mention "Trump" (hint: they're conveniently all in this "world news, current events & politics" section).

So...foregoing that discussion...how long do you think it'll take until he resigns, quits, flees the country, vanishes in thin air or otherwise else not be president anymore ?


----------



## WiiUBricker (Mar 4, 2019)

I fully trust that the people of the United States of America will elect that moron for 4 more years.


----------



## barronwaffles (Mar 4, 2019)

Nothing is going to happen.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Mar 4, 2019)

WiiUBricker said:


> I fully trust that the Electoral Colleges of the United States of America will elect that moron for 4 more years.



FTFY. Even though it was by a small margin? The people voted for Clinton. :x


----------



## callmebob (Mar 4, 2019)

Never underestimate the stupidity of the average American voter. Trump will get re-elected, and the GoP controlled senate would never allow an impeachment.

I doubt Pence would get his party´s nomination without Trump, much less win a general election.

Maybe Trump has a heart attack, or a massive stroke (he probably already has had one) allowing Pence to become president for a while.

Otherwise Pence will never be President.


----------



## leon315 (Mar 4, 2019)

Memoir said:


> FTFY. Even though it was by a small margin? The people voted for Clinton. :x


will Hillary try the race for presidency once again?


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Mar 4, 2019)

leon315 said:


> will Hillary try the race for presidency once again?


I hope not.


----------



## Viri (Mar 4, 2019)

barronwaffles said:


> Nothing is going to happen.


This. 

Also, probably not. If election cycles continues, then a Democrat will probably win in 2024, if Trump is re-elected.


----------



## leon315 (Mar 4, 2019)

Viri said:


> 六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人權 Human Rights 民運 Democratization 自由 Freedom 獨立 Independence 多黨制 Multi-party system 民主 言論 思想 反共 反革命 抗議 運動 騷亂 暴亂 騷擾 擾亂 抗暴 平反 維權 示威游行 法輪功 Falun Dafa 李洪志 法輪大法 大法弟子 強制斷種 強制堕胎 民族淨化 人體實驗 胡耀邦 趙紫陽 魏京生 王丹 還政於民 和平演變 激流中國 北京之春 大紀元時報 九評論共産黨 獨裁 專制 壓制 統一 監視 鎮壓 迫害 侵略 掠奪 破壞 拷問 屠殺 肅清 活摘器官 黑社會 誘拐 買賣人口 遊進 走私 毒品 賣淫 春畫 賭博 六合彩
> .


i'm quit curious about ur signature, wtf is this?


----------



## notimp (Mar 4, 2019)

barronwaffles said:


> Nothing is going to happen.


This.

Impeachment is only going forward, if the other side is fairly certain, that they can benefit from it. In terms of popularity gain, that is. Currently its mostly public Schadenfreude, not so much outrage. If it is growing who knows - but news cycles are short today. Much more likely that the next story will capture the popular sentiments of the day shortly...


----------



## Hanafuda (Mar 4, 2019)

In January 2025, after he wins the 2024 election.


nah, just kidding. Pence didn't roll well on charisma. I agree with @callmembob above, that Pence can't and wouldn't win as the headliner.


----------



## SG854 (Mar 4, 2019)

2 hrs 43 minuets and 63 seconds starting a day after next week

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Memoir said:


> I hope not.


Andrew Yang


----------



## kumikochan (Mar 4, 2019)

leon315 said:


> will Hillary try the race for presidency once again?


Yeah she already said she was going to try again not so long ago


----------



## SG854 (Mar 4, 2019)

kumikochan said:


> Yeah she already said she was going to try again not so long ago


She’s a joke. She already lost to 2 presidents. Crooked Hilary is how people know her know.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Mar 4, 2019)

SG854 said:


> 2 hrs 43 minuets and 63 seconds starting a day after next week
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> ...


Voting Yang actually


----------



## SG854 (Mar 4, 2019)

Memoir said:


> Voting Yang actually


Me too, rooting for Yang. He seems the best so far.


----------



## SG854 (Mar 4, 2019)

@Memoir Tucker Carlson on Fox is also rooting for Yang. And his shows is one of the most watched shows on television, so Yang has a chance to be more known.

I gave up on Bernie Sanders. He got a taste of the millionaire life. And is now being a hypocrite. He complains why do people need to own multiple yachts yet he has 3 houses in not so cheap areas. And he’s playing into identitarian politics, like the female wage gap that has been debunked continuously for over 50 yrs.

 Now he’s just saying what people wanna hear for votes. Yang doesn’t seem to be doing this.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 4, 2019)

He won't resign, and he won't transfer power peacefully when he loses.  The presidency is the only thing protecting Trump from prosecution, and he knows it.

The rest of the Republican party isn't so much protecting Trump as they are protecting themselves.  He's the face they're using to absorb all the blame, but a lot more people have been dipping their hands into the Russian honeypot, as well.


----------



## spotanjo3 (Mar 4, 2019)

Taleweaver said:


> Seriously: if you have to ask what this is about, you've been living under a rock. And you can join the many discussions that somewhere mention "Trump" (hint: they're conveniently all in this "world news, current events & politics" section).
> 
> So...foregoing that discussion...how long do you think it'll take until he resigns, quits, flees the country, vanishes in thin air or otherwise else not be president anymore ?



@Taleweaver,

All are the CORRUPT. They are the coward human being that doesn't make Earth better ever. Never. They are the MONSTERS, LOVELESS, SELFISH, MONEY LOVER AND GREEDY. So I dont bother to vote none of them. The POLITICS are CORRUPTIONS! Always was and always will be. Earth will not survive because of stupid human being like them.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Mar 4, 2019)

SG854 said:


> @Memoir Tucker Carlson on Fox is also rooting for Yang. And his shows is one of the most watched shows on television, so Yang has a chance to be more known.
> 
> I gave up on Bearnie Sanders. He got a taste of the millionaire life. And is now being a hypocrite. He complains why do people need to own multiple yachts yet he has 3 houses in not so cheap areas. And he’s playing into identitarian politics, like the female wage gap that has been debunked continuously for over 50 yrs.
> 
> Now he’s just saying what people wanna hear for votes. Yang doesn’t seem to be doing this.


There's just something about him that has me hopeful..


----------



## leon315 (Mar 4, 2019)

SG854 said:


> Me too, rooting for Yang. He seems the best so far.


wait, wuuuuuuut? xD oh my gosh, you guys are drunk as f


----------



## Xzi (Mar 4, 2019)

SG854 said:


> I gave up on Bearnie Sanders. He got a taste of the millionaire life. And is now being a hypocrite. He complains why do people need to own multiple yachts yet he has 3 houses in not so cheap areas. And he’s playing into identitarian politics, like the female wage gap that has been debunked continuously for over 50 yrs.


Sanders has been a millionaire for quite some time, that doesn't mean he started out that way or that it makes him a hypocrite.  His policies would raise taxes on himself.



azoreseuropa said:


> All are the CORRUPT. They are the coward human being that doesn't make Earth better ever. Never. They are the MONSTERS, LOVELESS, SELFISH, MONEY LOVER AND GREEDY. So I dont bother to vote none of them. The POLITICS are CORRUPTIONS! Always was and always will be. Earth will not survive because of stupid human being like them.


There's no comparing previous presidents to Trump.  "Normal" corruption like accepting lobbyist money seems downright quaint now.  Instead we've got a president that takes the word of dictators and despots at face value over the word of our own intelligence agencies.

'Trumpified' history looks a little like this:


----------



## sarkwalvein (Mar 4, 2019)

Does anybody consider Pence a good option?
I would take three Trumps before a Pence, and I don't like Trump.

But perhaps he gets to be president if Trump dies early, he doesn't look too healthy TBH.


----------



## spotanjo3 (Mar 4, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Sanders has been a millionaire for quite some time, that doesn't mean he started out that way or that it makes him a hypocrite.  His policies would raise taxes on himself.
> 
> 
> There's no comparing previous presidents to Trump.  "Normal" corruption like accepting lobbyist money seems downright quaint now.  Instead we've got a president that takes the word of dictators and despots at face value over the word of our own intelligence agencies.
> ...



Very true. However, they are all corrupts anyway. Trump is the worst one, of course.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 4, 2019)

sarkwalvein said:


> Does anybody consider Pence a good option?
> I would take three Trumps before a Pence, and I don't like Trump.
> 
> But perhaps he gets to be president if Trump dies early, he doesn't look too healthy TBH.


Either of them is essentially a lame duck for two years regardless. They got their tax cuts for the rich passed and that's all they really cared about.  Pence is evil and creepy, but I am confident that he can at least remember what he had for breakfast this morning, unlike Trump.


----------



## Glyptofane (Mar 4, 2019)

Does anyone else think Pence looks like an old man version of a Ken doll?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



leon315 said:


> wait, wuuuuuuut? xD oh my gosh, you guys are drunk as f


Andrew Yang identifies as a white man and wants to give me $1000. Seems good enough to me.


----------



## notimp (Mar 4, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Pence is evil and creepy


Neh, just strikes me as a Yesman, that finds some pleasure in spilling out the truths he had to hold secret in public. Evil? He was a 'fixer'. (In movie parlance..) since when are those evil?  Creepy. Nah. A little socially awkward.  Also a bit of a cultivator of his own image...  Surprisingly controlled, unless you tell him that hes violated law principles, then he gets emotional.. 

Watched the first part of the hearings. Surprisingly entertaining..


----------



## kuwanger (Mar 4, 2019)

sarkwalvein said:


> Does anybody consider Pence a good option?
> I would take three Trumps before a Pence, and I don't like Trump.



No.  If I were more conspiracy minded, I'd think that the Republicans voted for Trump precisely as a shield against the Republicans in Congress.  And then I'd further believe they chosen Pence as a shield against Trump ever being impeached and removed from office.  I too vote with Pence is creepy, but I wouldn't go as far as evil.  He's just another Sarah Palin--someone who lacks so many critical traits needed to be a good President.  Then again, Trump is also another Sarah Palin...

I guess it just goes to show the truth, the office of Presidency is there to distract you from the workings of the shadow government.

PS - Just to spell out the creepy part:  'he “never eats alone with a woman other than his wife,” and that he doesn’t attend events serving alcohol unless she is with him as well.' -- The religious reasons Mike Pence won’t eat alone with women don’t add up  The really important part is this:  'The impulse that led to the Billy Graham Rule — which was actually a solidification of principles guarding against several kinds of temptation — is a good and honorable one: to remain faithful to one’s spouse and to avoid the kind of behavior (or rumors of behavior) that have destroyed the careers of church leaders. Evangelical pastors having affairs is so common as to almost be cliche, and damages the integrity of the church.'

Every bit of that makes it clear, the rule exists to protect against "rumor" that will "[destroy] the career" of a person which "damages the integrity of the [business]" and must be proactively combated.  It makes perfect sense, then, that a politician should do these things for his career.  It would seem at best incidentally to protect his marriage.  It strongly implies a substantial lack of self-control, which unsurprisingly results in the same sort of fundamentalist projections on society--be they Christian, Muslim, or other--that demand that society change to insure their moral integrity.  Also, the behavior does nothing to resolve the "dead hooker or live boy" cliche--right out of Sparta--which always seems to follow the anti-LGBTQ "thou does protest too much".


----------



## Xzi (Mar 4, 2019)

notimp said:


> He was a 'fixer'. (In movie parlance..) since when are those evil?


Well, Michael Cohen is getting locked up for also being a "fixer," so...



notimp said:


> Creepy. Nah. A little socially awkward.


He looks like the type of guy to ask his mother if it's okay before masturbating.


----------



## SG854 (Mar 4, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Sanders has been a millionaire for quite some time, that doesn't mean he started out that way or that it makes him a hypocrite.  His policies would raise taxes on himself.
> 
> 
> There's no comparing previous presidents to Trump.  "Normal" corruption like accepting lobbyist money seems downright quaint now.  Instead we've got a president that takes the word of dictators and despots at face value over the word of our own intelligence agencies.
> ...


There’s a lot of millionaire people on the Democratic side that doesn’t actually mean it and are hypocrites.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 4, 2019)

SG854 said:


> There’s a lot of millionaire people on the Democratic side that doesn’t actually mean it and are hypocrites.


Not true, the Starbucks guy wouldn't have threatened to split the vote if he thought they wouldn't go through with their proposals.  The billionaires are quite worried about Sanders or a Sanders-like figure getting elected.

There are a few Democratic candidates that are too centrist for my taste, but I wouldn't really call them hypocrites, either.


----------



## notimp (Mar 4, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Well, Michael Cohen is getting locked up for also being a "fixer," so...


Ah yes, I forgot. 


Xzi said:


> He looks like the type of guy to ask his mother if it's okay before masturbating.


Hrhr - but he actually enjoyed going against his submissive streak in the hearings. So good for him...


----------



## SG854 (Mar 4, 2019)

Memoir said:


> There's just something about him that has me hopeful..


He still hasn’t won me over on UBI, Finland tired it out and it didn’t work out too good.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/549087002

But Automation will be a problem in the future, and by 2030 most jobs making under $20 will be replaced with robots. So he has my attention, and i’ll see how the UBI argument will turn out as more people debate it.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Mar 4, 2019)

SG854 said:


> He still hasn’t won me over on UBI, Finland tired it out and it didn’t work out to good.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/549087002
> 
> But Automation will be a problem in the future, and by 2030 most jobs making under $20 will be replaced with robots. So he has my attention, and i’ll see how he UBI argument will turn out.


Right, but Finland has an entirely different economic structure than we do. So, we'll see.


----------



## Lacius (Mar 4, 2019)

Disclaimer: I have not read anything in this thread.

I think it's reasonable to guess that Trump will resign very soon before the end of his term so Pence has time to pardon him of all (federal) crimes. I doubt impeachment will go anywhere, considering the lengths his party will go to defend him.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 4, 2019)

SG854 said:


> He still hasn’t won me over on UBI, Finland tired it out and it didn’t work out to good.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/549087002
> 
> But Automation will be a problem in the future, and by 2030 most jobs making under $20 will be replaced with robots. So he has my attention, and i’ll see how he UBI argument will turn out as more people debate it.


Yeah, pretty soon we're not going to have the luxury of debating "if" we should have a UBI or not, it's either that or the majority of consumers lose all spending power and the economy collapses.  Eighty percent of American jobs are in the service industry, and every one of those jobs can potentially be automated.


----------



## leon315 (Mar 4, 2019)

Glyptofane said:


> Does anyone else think Pence looks like an old man version of a Ken doll?
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> ...


you mean give 1000 to buy ur vote?
SOLD OUT


----------



## Glyptofane (Mar 4, 2019)

leon315 said:


> you mean give 1000 to buy ur vote?
> SOLD OUT


It's a joke, dude. I am a national socialist. Probably never voting again.


----------



## orangy57 (Mar 4, 2019)

on a related note, if america is somehow dumb enough to elect trump for a second term, we deserve whatever crap comes from it


----------



## Xzi (Mar 4, 2019)

Orangy57 said:


> on a related note, if america is somehow dumb enough to elect trump for a second term, we deserve whatever crap comes from it


Yeah I'm outtie 5000 if we elect Trump again.  I've joked about it in the past when I thought GWB is as bad as it would get, but it's like this country has a tumor right on the memory center of its brain.  Electing competent leadership for eight years means absolutely nothing if you elect a dumpster fire for even four afterward.  It's far easier to break shit than it is to create something worth preserving.

So yeah...Canada it is unless this country can get its head on straight and avoids becoming a third-world Banana Republic.  Trump doesn't want to be president, he wants to be king just like his buddies Kim Jong Un, Mohammad Bin Salman, and Vlad.


----------



## Captain_N (Mar 4, 2019)

SG854 said:


> Me too, rooting for Yang. He seems the best so far.



So how is Yang gonna pay for a UBI of $1000/m? Tax rate of 60%. You relise that all these social programs these dem leftists want will raise the tax rate to atleast 60% if not 50%. Since you seem to like yang, you must like his policies. Care to give 60% of your current pay check to the government so that the rest of us can sit at home and play video games all day?


----------



## Xzi (Mar 4, 2019)

Captain_N said:


> So how is Yang gonna pay for a UBI of $1000/m? Tax rate of 60%. You relise that all these social programs these dem leftists want will raise the tax rate to atleast 60% if not 50%. Since you seem to like yang, you must like his policies. Care to give 60% of your current pay check to the government so that the rest of us can sit at home and play video games all day?


A UBI is for the purpose of countering the effects of automation, so the answer seems simple: tax automation to pay for the UBI.  It's the robots that will be losing most of their paycheck, but that check would've been going straight to the CEO anyway.  A UBI won't be an absolute necessity until ~10% of normally human-occupied positions have been automated already.


----------



## Captain_N (Mar 4, 2019)

Xzi said:


> A UBI is for the purpose of countering the effects of automation, so the answer seems simple: tax automation to pay for the UBI.  It's the robots that will be losing most of their paycheck, but that check would've been going straight to the CEO anyway.  A UBI won't be an absolute necessity until ~10% of normally human-occupied positions have been automated already.



Taxing the automation wont be enough most items are manufactured in China. Stores will get rid of their automation then there will be no automation to tax. What then. Tax automation in the states and those renaming manufacturing plants will move to china or some other country. A company is gonna pay their CEO regardless. They will just charge more for their goods. I bet if you owned a company that manufactured goods in the USA you would move that plant to china or would you rather just close up shop?

You seem to be against the capitalist nature of the USA which is fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion.  that said, would you rather no one ever be able to own a company/business? Would you prefer if the government owned everything? what about landownership? The last time i checked, more innovations,wealth prosperity and discoveries have been accomplished done by free individuals they any government in all of recorded history. SO why go back to a system that limits the individual?


oh and for the topic, no way pence would be president during an election. Trump would have to be impeached.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 4, 2019)

Captain_N said:


> Taxing the automation wont be enough most items are manufactured in China. Tax automation in the states and those renaming manufacturing plants will move to china or some other country. If a company is gonna pay their CEO regardless. They will just charge more for their goods. I bet if you owned a company that manufactured goods in the USA you would move that plant to china or would you rather just close up shop?


Again, employment in the US is 80% service industry jobs.  Jobs that can't be moved outside of the US because they're specifically for the purpose of servicing the needs of Americans.  These are the jobs in danger of automation, not overseas manufacturing.  A lot of those plants continue to use human labor because the minimum wage where they're located is a lot cheaper than the price of automation, but in the US the opposite is true, even when taking taxes into account.  Automation is going to become irresistible to employers in the not-too-distant future.


----------



## Darth Meteos (Mar 4, 2019)

the next president of the united states will be bernie sanders
that isn't a prediction, it's a spoiler


----------



## Captain_N (Mar 4, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Again, employment in the US is 80% service industry jobs.  Jobs that can't be moved outside of the US because they're specifically for the purpose of servicing the needs of Americans.  These are the jobs in danger of automation, not overseas manufacturing.  A lot of those plants continue to use human labor because the minimum wage where they're located is a lot cheaper than the price of automation, but in the US the opposite is true, even when taking taxes into account.  Automation is going to become irresistible to employers in the not-too-distant future.



Yes their are a lot of service based jobs. I'm employed at one of them at a academic institution. You said the UBI would be paid by taxing automation. From what you just said, their does not seem to be enough automation to tax. Also, I was reading Yang's material on his own page. He wants to have the government create a new digital currency called "Digital Social Credit" you get paid on how well you do what the government says to do. That is not even close to what he is calling "Human Centered"
Thats government centered, not individual centered. Its the same as the new system in china that credits you on how good a citizen you are lol. Its a shame people keep falling for this "more government is better" crap. The dems give no other solution then bigger government. 

There is no way Pence could compete with all this free government aid.   Health care, UBI at $1000/m, free schools. I cant see pence winning anything.

Ref https://www.yang2020.com/policies/human-capitalism/


----------



## SG854 (Mar 4, 2019)

Captain_N said:


> So how is Yang gonna pay for a UBI of $1000/m? Tax rate of 60%. You relise that all these social programs these dem leftists want will raise the tax rate to atleast 60% if not 50%. Since you seem to like yang, you must like his policies. Care to give 60% of your current pay check to the government so that the rest of us can sit at home and play video games all day?


Our society is changing. The current economic system may not work in the future. Automation is going to be a problem. And we need a solution and I’m open to ideas. Yang, while I’m still not 100% on board on UBI, has ideas that are good to debate.

What’s the best way, you think we should do, to solve the automation problem? Besides UBI is there something better you can come up with?


----------



## Xzi (Mar 4, 2019)

Captain_N said:


> Yes their are a lot of service based jobs. I'm employed at one of them at a academic institution. You said the UBI would be paid by taxing automation. From what you just said, their does not seem to be enough automation to tax.


Repeating myself again here, but this is future-tense.  Once ~10% of human employees are replaced, the need for a UBI will become much more pressing.  Still, it's best to be prepared for the inevitable, and that's why having the discussion now is a good thing.



Captain_N said:


> Also, I was reading Yang's material on his own page. He wants to have the government create a new digital currency called "Digital Social Credit" you get paid on how well you do what the government says to do. That is not even close to what he is calling "Human Centered"
> Thats government centered, not individual centered. Its the same as the new system in china that credits you on how good a citizen you are lol. Its a shame people keep falling for this "more government is better" crap. The dems give no other solution then bigger government.
> 
> There is no way Pence could compete with all this free government aid.   Health care, UBI at $1000/m, free schools. I cant see pence winning anything.
> ...


Yang isn't my favorite candidate at the moment, but this still seems a bit disingenuous.  He's not suggesting you get paid based on government compliance, that's not how a UBI works.

If Pence has to run in place of Trump, then the reason he'll lose has nothing to do with whoever his opponent is.  Just like Trump, Pence has no new ideas or policy platforms of his own, but he also doesn't have the WWE personality of Trump.  So Pence appeals to basically nobody.


----------



## SG854 (Mar 4, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Repeating myself again here, but this is future-tense.  Once ~10% of human employees are replaced, the need for a UBI will become much more pressing.  Still, it's best to be prepared for the inevitable, and that's why having the discussion now is a good thing.
> 
> 
> Yang isn't my favorite candidate at the moment, but this still seems a bit disingenuous.  He's not suggesting you get paid based on government compliance, that's not how a UBI works.
> ...


It’s estimated by 2030 that the shift will happen. And that’s not along way. And it will happen in increments over the years as we get closer to 2030 (automation replacing people), and not all at once at 2030. So it’s affecting us now, the inevitable is already happening.


----------



## kuwanger (Mar 5, 2019)

I think this is worth watching.  The reason we have an 80% service economic model is because we had a 80%+ agricultural economic model.  What the future holds, I have no idea.  It's simply not enough to argue a lot of service business jobs are threatened and replaced because that's literally been what's happening for decades.  Is UBI part of the answer?  Perhaps.  I would say I heavily believe that "AI" replacing jobs is insanely overblown, the actual process of automation will take decades, and the truth is it's jobs $20/hour and over that are more threatened than $20/hour and under--robots cost a lot of money and take a lot of time to recoup that investment.

So, all of that out of the way, I can't see Pence, Trump, or really most politicians in a good position to really understand what the best thing is.  I think Oliver is right that a large part of it should be retraining people for specific jobs, but it won't be at all a complete answer.  I don't think wage insurance is viable.  People having multiple careers is probably going to be more the norm.  I don't think it's accurate that innovation is "speeding up", though.  People just don't have a good perspective of how disruptive the past was.  I definitely don't trust most politicians who say they're supporters of the free market, as to me that's usually more a statement of their cronyism to entrenched interests, not disruptive movement away from their campaign financiers.


----------



## Nerdtendo (Mar 5, 2019)

Nothing's gonna happen to Trump. We might even see a second term. I don't think he's screwing up our country as bad as Clinton would have but that's beside the point.


----------



## Viri (Mar 5, 2019)

Lacius said:


> Disclaimer: I have not read anything in this thread.
> 
> I think it's reasonable to guess that Trump will resign very soon before the end of his term so Pence has time to pardon him of all (federal) crimes. I doubt impeachment will go anywhere, considering the lengths his party will go to defend him.


Oh ho ho! Do you wanna make a bet on this one? We all remember how correct you were about the 2016 election!



kuwanger said:


> PS - Just to spell out the creepy part: 'he “never eats alone with a woman other than his wife,” and that he doesn’t attend events serving alcohol unless she is with him as well.' -- The religious reasons Mike Pence won’t eat alone with women don’t add up


There are a lot of things to rag on Pence and hate him for. Not wanting to meet up and eat with women alone, without his wife present isn't one of them. The man just loves his wife a lot, doesn't want to make her feel insecure, and doesn't want to end up "metooed".

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



leon315 said:


> i'm quit curious about ur signature, wtf is this?


Stuff mainland China doesn't like.


----------



## Lacius (Mar 5, 2019)

Viri said:


> Oh ho ho! Do you wanna make a bet on this one? We all remember how correct you were about the 2016 election!
> 
> 
> There are a lot of things to rag on Pence and hate him for. Not wanting to meet up and eat with women alone, without his wife present isn't one of them. The man just loves his wife a lot, doesn't want to make her feel insecure, and doesn't want to end up "metooed".


As far as I remember, I didn't make any predictions except to say Clinton was more likely to win (she was) while acknowledging that Trump had a significant 30% or so chance of winning. It's why I talked about the presidential race so much and urged Bernie supporters to vote for Clinton instead of staying home. If the race hadn't been as close as it was, I probably would have cared less.

Regardless though of what I said or what the odds were, it was reasonable to say Clinton would probably win, and it's reasonable now to think Trump might resign sometime after losing the 2020 election but with enough time for Pence to issue some pardons.

Edit: I also acknowledged a good chance that Trump would lose the popular vote but win the Electoral College, but nobody listened.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Mar 5, 2019)

Captain_N said:


> So how is Yang gonna pay for a UBI of $1000/m? Tax rate of 60%. You relise that all these social programs these dem leftists want will raise the tax rate to atleast 60% if not 50%. Since you seem to like yang, you must like his policies. Care to give 60% of your current pay check to the government so that the rest of us can sit at home and play video games all day?


You're an extremist, I take it? To grossly exaggerate a tax hike like it's legitimately the only option really speaks volumes to me. There are plenty of other areas they can pull funding from.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 5, 2019)

Lacius said:


> it's reasonable now to think Trump might resign sometime after losing the 2020 election but with enough time for Pence to issue some pardons.


Can one actually resign the presidency _after_ losing the election?  Has this ever been done before?


----------



## Captain_N (Mar 5, 2019)

SG854 said:


> Our society is changing. The current economic system may not work in the future. Automation is going to be a problem. And we need a solution and I’m open to ideas. Yang, while I’m still not 100% on board on UBI, has ideas that are good to debate.
> 
> What’s the best way, you think we should do, to solve the automation problem? Besides UBI is there something better you can come up with?



People are going to have to change their jobs and skills. No individual can get by with only one skill. People will have to know more then one skill in school. Trades can be taken up and require minimal schooling. Factory jobs were only the first ones to be replaced by automation. Service jobs will be taken when we have robots like in the movie I, robot. If the Ai does not become self aware and we get to Star trek levels,and we become a space faring civilization, money might not even be a thing. Its alittle hard to look 300 years into the future. 
I have not found a single Dem running that does not think more government is the solution to the problems we face. It is a proven fact that when a society is free, it prospers. There is an insentive to become more, get rich, achieve something. In a place rulled by the government, like cuba and north korea, their is no incentive for self improvement. Look at cuba, its time locked in the 1960's and im not talking about the cars. the buildings are in a state of disrepair, the people know they can never do anything to become rich. They cant own land, cant own a business.


----------



## Lacius (Mar 5, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Can one actually resign the presidency _after_ losing the election?  Has this ever been done before?


My interpretation is if one were to resign after losing an election but before the new president is sworn in, the current vice president would be sworn in as president in the interim.

My understanding is the president-elect cannot be sworn in early, unless Congress passes a new law allowing it, so that's the only option. However, hypothetically, what if a president resigned or died the day before the new president was sworn in? Would the current VP be sworn in as president for a day? Would the VP merely be acting president until the president-elect was sworn in? It's muddy, but if we take everything literally, I think my interpretation is correct, and we would have a president serving a term of one day.

Edit: In the case of Trump, he'd probably resign many weeks before the new president is sworn in. The above was just a thought experiment.


----------



## kuwanger (Mar 5, 2019)

Viri said:


> There are a lot of things to rag on Pence and hate him for. Not wanting to meet up and eat with women alone, without his wife present isn't one of them. The man just loves his wife a lot, doesn't want to make her feel insecure, and doesn't want to end up "metooed".



So, you're saying that Pence shouldn't go to a lunch with Pelosi to discuss some matters of Congress because he loves his wife and doesn't want her to feel insecure?  Or that if he would do such a thing, there's a serious risk he would be #metoo'd even though he could be #metoo'd regardless by males or females alike because, obviously, people who go around sexually assaulting people can't be trusted to do a little thing like being actually truthful about not having private dinners with individuals?

Seriously, the argument is bogus.  If he wants to spend time with his wife, that's great.  If he almost always has lunch with her, that's awesome.  But these hard rules about not eating dinner with a woman?  Not going to social functions with alcohol unless his wife is present?  Those things literally sound like someone who is so "tempted" by a possible misconstrued date with a woman or a little alcohol and no chaperone that they really shouldn't be trusted to *ever* be alone.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 5, 2019)

Captain_N said:


> People are going to have to change their jobs and skills. No individual can get by with only one skill. People will have to know more then one skill in school. Trades can be taken up and require minimal schooling.


There will be no jobs to change to, short of perhaps the arts and entertainment industry.  Teaching AI to do anything else won't be that difficult.



Lacius said:


> My interpretation is if one were to resign after losing an election but before the new president is sworn in, the current vice president would be sworn in as president in the interim.


It makes sense, but I think such a move would be highly contentious.  Another nebulous constitutional crisis with no clear precedent to guide us through.


----------



## Lacius (Mar 5, 2019)

Xzi said:


> There will be no jobs to change to, short of perhaps the arts and entertainment industry.  Teaching AI to do anything else won't be that difficult.
> 
> 
> It makes sense, but I think such a move would be highly contentious.  Another nebulous constitutional crisis with no clear precedent to guide us through.


While we don't have precedent of it happening after a lost election, we do have precedent of a criminal president resigning to be pardoned by the VP-turned-president.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 5, 2019)

Lacius said:


> While we don't have precedent of it happening after a lost election, we do have precedent of a criminal president resigning to be pardoned by the VP-turned-president.


The good news is that Mueller has a fail-safe set up through SDNY, so anybody that gets pardoned for blatant violations of federal law automatically gets referred to prosecution on the state level for equivalent charges.  In that way he's got Trump completely boxed in.  Mueller could also simply wait until the new administration is in place before bringing the charges at all, since you can't pardon people for future charges.


----------



## Viri (Mar 5, 2019)

kuwanger said:


> So, you're saying that Pence shouldn't go to a lunch with Pelosi to discuss some matters of Congress


Why does it have to be lunch? Maybe he'd prefer to discuss congress matters in a meeting with her, in his office or something? Not wanting to go to lunch with another female, doesn't prevent him and her from discussing professional things. If Nancy wants to discuss things, there are other ways to do it. Eating alone is reserved for only him and his wife. 


kuwanger said:


> Those things literally sound like someone who is so "tempted" by a possible misconstrued date with a woman or a little alcohol and no chaperone that they really shouldn't be trusted to *ever* be alone.


Maybe he just doesn't want his wife to feel insecure? And doesn't want to risk making her feel that way. His wife and himself probably knows how people with power tend to sleep around, so he wants to her to feel rest assured.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 5, 2019)

I don't even want to think about the possible reasons why Mike Pence believes he can't have lunch with Nancy Pelosi without his wife present.  Pelosi ain't hot.  Does he have a need to choke old ladies to death or something?  Like I said, I don't want to think about it, just another weird/creepy Pence mystery.

Actually...if he's gay then everything makes sense.  The only time I've seen Republican politicians be this overly-committed to the 'devoted Christian anti-gay husband' act is when they're hooking up with dudes in airport bathrooms or some shit.


----------



## Viri (Mar 5, 2019)

I don't think he's gay. Though, I'm sure there are a lot of gay men who wouldn't say no to older Race Bannon. 

I just think he's really old fashion, and respects his wife enough to not want to make her feel insecure. If you're a female, there are countless ways to speak privately with Pence. In his office, her office, at congress, etc. There are tons of reasons to rag on Pence, but I don't think this should be one of them.


----------



## The Catboy (Mar 5, 2019)

The potential of Pence being the next president actually scares the shit out of me. Republicans didn't even like Trump and they still bent over backward for him, I am terrified to find out how far they will bend for someone they actually like.


----------



## kuwanger (Mar 5, 2019)

Viri said:


> Why does it have to be lunch? Maybe he'd prefer to discuss congress matters in a meeting with her, in his office or something? Not wanting to go to lunch with another female, doesn't prevent him and her from discussing professional things. If Nancy wants to discuss things, there are other ways to do it. Eating alone is reserved for only him and his wife.



As Xzi points out, it's just absolutely bizarre.  If he's alone with Pelosi, is he allowed to have a tic tac*?  Why would his wife care if it were Mr Congressman or Mrs Congressman?  Sure, he can choose to not eat with anyone but his wife, but that's not the standard.  He's perfectly allowed to eat lunch alone with McConnell.



Viri said:


> Maybe he just doesn't want his wife to feel insecure? And doesn't want to risk making her feel that way. His wife and himself probably knows how people with power tend to sleep around, so he wants to her to feel rest assured.



Why would she feel insecure?  Does he have a habit of sleeping around?  Of lying?  Of otherwise doing suspicious things?  Oh, and plenty of people without power sleep around.  If anything, it sounds like either he has a wife who has extreme jealousy issues or Pence is a neurotic who belittles his wife proposing she thinks he's just so irresistible that women are constantly throwing themselves at him.



Viri said:


> I don't think he's gay.



I wouldn't presume it, but "people with power to sleep around [with all sorts of people]".  If Pence is doing it just to help his insecure wife, he really should avoid being alone with anyone.



Viri said:


> I just think he's really old fashion, and respects his wife enough to not want to make her feel insecure. If you're a female, there are countless ways to speak privately with Pence. In his office, her office, at congress, etc. There are tons of reasons to rag on Pence, but I don't think this should be one of them.



Except there's nothing "really old fashion" about having deep seated paranoia about eating lunch alone with a member of the opposite sex.  It's obvious Pence's choice to do whatever to placate supposed fears of his wife, but trying to couch it as anything other than a very odd character quirk on Pence's part is disingenuous.  Tying it with Billy Graham only makes the situation worse--the point was that so many men *were* having affairs, they started pushing rules to try to prevent "rumors" of affairs.  Which is why the whole "maybe he's gay" keeps coming up, because like the Spartans the people who are so obsessed with sex to live their lives with very conditional rules may eventually look for loopholes.  It's the same with Catholics and the joke of being a "technical virgin".

* I might as well make the joke.  "Don't worry, honey.  It technically wasn't lunch because Pelosi didn't swallow."


----------



## Lacius (Mar 5, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Pelosi ain't hot.


Speak for yourself.


----------



## CallmeBerto (Mar 5, 2019)

He just doesn't want to get MeToo'ed is all. Smart man tbh.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 6, 2019)

CallmeBerto said:


> He just doesn't want to get MeToo'ed is all. Smart man tbh.


Do you recognize that this is sexist?  If Pence can't talk to and work with another elected representative simply because he's "scared" that's she's a woman, he has no fucking business being the Vice President.  He has no business managing a Burger King at that point.  Women are everywhere beyond your front door, some might even say they're 50% of the population.


----------



## CallmeBerto (Mar 6, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Do you recognize that this is sexist?  If Pence can't talk to and work with another elected representative simply because he's "scared" that's she's a woman, he has no fucking business being the Vice President.  He has no business managing a Burger King at that point.  Women are everywhere beyond your front door, some might even say they're 50% of the population.




I would agree, but here is the problem if he were to get falsely accused his career is over. I could pull up dozens of stories of women making shit up, they getting found out that they were full of shit and NOTHING happing to them.

Again I don't agree with it but he is just trying to protect himself; more maybe is likes the geys who knows?


----------



## Xzi (Mar 6, 2019)

CallmeBerto said:


> Again I don't agree with it but he is just trying to protect himself; more maybe is likes the geys who knows?


The thing is that you're still suggesting the _Vice President_ needs to protect himself from being falsely "MeToo'd" by the _Speaker of the House._  Your premise is ludicrous.


----------

