Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LeftishBrit

(41,190 posts)
22. If that had been the case in the UK...
Tue Dec 13, 2016, 01:59 PM
Dec 2016

Churchill could not have been our Prime Minister during WW2.

Mandela could not have been president of South Africa under that rule.

I think the better approach might be to find a better way of dealing with the temporary or permanent succession if the president becomes ill.

In those days they had no idea treestar Dec 2016 #1
Take a look at age at death of marybourg Dec 2016 #8
I don't think they had the idea of being "too old" treestar Dec 2016 #26
Not really. former9thward Dec 2016 #15
Why? ZoomBubba Dec 2016 #2
I wish it weren't so hard to change amendments set in place by men wearing powdered wigs! dubyadiprecession Dec 2016 #3
Yes, nothing protects civil liberties like a document that's easy to change. hughee99 Dec 2016 #6
My bad. Instead of saying hard, i should have said Impossible. dubyadiprecession Dec 2016 #11
Its not impossible. former9thward Dec 2016 #17
I agree philosslayer Dec 2016 #12
As were Aristophanes, Aristotle, and Plato who also rationalized slavery and misogyny. LanternWaste Dec 2016 #32
Interestingly enough, the thoughts can exist in one mind at the same time. NCTraveler Dec 2016 #33
You are abysmally ignorant of US history if you think the framers of the Constitution were fundies Hekate Dec 2016 #20
Bravo! Good post! Kilgore Dec 2016 #29
In 200 years, history will look at those who supported marriage between a man and women yeoman6987 Dec 2016 #28
The 3/5 clause was changed Jose Garcia Dec 2016 #30
14 or fight braddy Dec 2016 #4
Of the 4 "major" candidates in the last election, Gary Johnson would have been the only one hughee99 Dec 2016 #5
Maybe he might make the debates then. CK_John Dec 2016 #7
So you didn't support Hillary Clinton OR Bernie Sanders? philosslayer Dec 2016 #9
You are making a wrong conclusion. CK_John Dec 2016 #10
Since you didn't bother to explain your reasoning, you can understand why. brooklynite Dec 2016 #13
It would avoid trying to change the constitution in today's world. CK_John Dec 2016 #16
No shit. If Clinton and Sanders weren't running there would have been... NCTraveler Dec 2016 #14
You keep harping on this "October surprise topic" but I don't recall CK_John Dec 2016 #18
How many posts equates to harping? NCTraveler Dec 2016 #19
Do you take part in the "Automation Denier" poll, sorry it has timed out. CK_John Dec 2016 #21
No. I was laughing too hard. NCTraveler Dec 2016 #23
If that had been the case in the UK... LeftishBrit Dec 2016 #22
It would have also eliminated a lot of US presidents Retrograde Dec 2016 #24
What? SickOfTheOnePct Dec 2016 #25
Sorry, caffiene hasn't kicked in yet Retrograde Dec 2016 #27
Been there on the caffiene front! n/t SickOfTheOnePct Dec 2016 #34
What objective belief leads you to wish as such? LanternWaste Dec 2016 #31
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I wish they had set the a...»Reply #22