Friday, December 23, 2016

Ready for 2020?

President-elect Donald Trump has yet to take office, but pollsters have already begun to dip their toes into the next presidential cycle.

[...]

Just over 22% of respondents said Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Party's failed candidate in the 2016 election, would excite them, while almost 15% said her running in 2020 would "make no difference" and about 62% said she should not run.

Vice President Joe Biden and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders both fared about twice as well as Clinton, but still failed to elicit excitement from a majority of respondents.

  CNN
Jesus, they'll be lucky to still be alive. How old are these folks in four years? Sorry to be ageist, but hey. Really.
If he were to run and win, the current vice president would be 78 years old at the time of taking office. Sanders would be 79, and Trump would be 74.

Meanwhile, about a third of respondents said they would be excited by a 2020 bid from Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
That's more like it.
Just under 50% of respondents said the [electoral college] system should stay in place, with almost 42% saying the Constitution should be amended to use the popular vote instead and just over 8% responding undecided.
Let me guess. The 42% were all Democrats.

You know, it sounds good: 1 person -1 vote. But the more heavily populated urban areas would always hold the winning hand. Why not just have California run the country? Unless we also plan on having ranked choice voting and giving states rights higher priority. This is a messy business.  I'm glad I don't have to run it. And believe me, you're glad of that, too.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

No comments: