No Stupid Questions

4348 readers

24 users here now

There is no such thing as a Stupid Question!

Don't be embarrassed of your curiosity; everyone has questions that they may feel uncomfortable asking certain people, so this place gives you a nice area not to be judged about asking it. Everyone here is willing to help.

ex. How do I change oil
ex. How to tie shoes
ex. Can you cry underwater?

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca still apply!

Thanks for reading all of this, even if you didn't read all of this, and your eye started somewhere else, have a watermelon slice 🍉.

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

admin@lemmy.ca

Was the 12th amendment a mistake? (lemmy.world)

submitted 4 weeks ago by ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world to c/nostupidquestions@lemmy.ca

49 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Before the 12th amendment, the presidential candidate who got the second most electoral votes became the vice president. This meant they were usually different parties.

It occurred to me that one thing this achieved was always ensuring that there was someone in the room who would be willing to disagree with the president. He couldn't surround himself with yes-men.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world 8 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)

You had my curiosity, but now you have my attention.

In all seriousness, what's the actual risk of the VP assassinating the president, given their vastly disparate levels of power?

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 7 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

what’s the actual risk

So he can assume the role of president? That's a large carrot to dangle before some really sketchy types.

[–] Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

Yeah, I get the motivation. I just meant that the VP seems to have miniscule power compared to the president.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

It probably wouldn't be the vice president themselves organizing the assassination, it would be people who benefit from them being in power.

[–] Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

Fair enough. I could see a corporation or billionaire offing the president by using the VP's security clearances.

[–] theworstshepard@fedinsfw.app 7 points 4 weeks ago

That's why they'd be motivated to kill the president

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 5 points 4 weeks ago

Well, by current standards, nothing the president does is illegal. So once the VP ascends, there is nothing anyone could do about it.

Well, except the next guy in line to be VP I guess...

[–] Canconda@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 weeks ago

IIRC that's basically the plot of "House of Cards". /s

In all seriousness

Depends on if we're talking Mexican style or Russian style assassinations. IMO the only way a bullet goes in the direction of the US president(ial-candidate) is if they want one to.

But a clandestine conspiracy using the full spectrum of technology from auditory weapons, to poisons, to windows... Gets a little dicey.

what's the actual risk of the VP assassinating the president

EoD what is the acceptable % increase in risk? Cuz it's the undeniable increase that's unacceptable from a security perspective.

From a practicality perspective, at what point does mitigating this risk make the entire partnership unproductive and pointless?