5

Yes, I am aware that November 2016 has long passed, but what would have to happen for Bernie to assume the presidency while Donald Trump is still president? I'm aware of a line of succession (president, vice president, Cabinet members), but what's the line of succession after that (for Bernie to win?)?

user
  • 773
  • 1
  • 5
  • 12
Irregardless
  • 213
  • 2
  • 7

1 Answers1

26

This is absurd. It will never happen. That said, Bernie Sanders would have to do one of

  1. Get appointed Vice President. This requires the VP slot to be vacated (by death, impeachment, resignation, etc.) and for someone to pick Bernie for it. Then the President has to leave.

  2. Get appointed to the cabinet. Then everyone ahead of him has to vacate.

  3. Get chosen as President pro tempore of the Senate. This typically goes to the longest tenured Senator of the majority party. It seems unlikely that Bernie would be accepted as a Republican, so the Democrats would have to take back the Senate.

    This is possible but unlikely in 2018, as so few Republicans are up for election and only one in a Democratic state. The Democrats need three. They might be better off hoping for resignations or deaths.

    After all that, Bernie still needs the President, Vice President, and Speaker of the House to vacate without being replaced. Also requires that the Democrats choose him and not someone who was actually elected as a Democrat. Technically, Bernie is still an independent.

  4. Leave the Senate and go back to the House of Representatives by either election or appointment. Be elected as Speaker of the House (similar problems as the Senate, although the House Democrats have a better chance at a majority after the 2018 elections). Requires the President and Vice President to vacate the office without replacement.

All of these choices are ridiculous. They each require multiple, weird things to happen. The most likely scenario might be a nuclear bomb in Washington, D.C. where Bernie happens to be out of town where everyone in the regular line of succession is there. Even that still requires him to be chosen as the President pro tempore of the Senate prior to a Speaker of the House being chosen. Or prior to the nuclear bomb--it's at least possible for 2019.

Bernie is not in the current line of succession. There's no succession after the cabinet. So he first has to get into it. Then everyone ahead of him needs to get out of the way at the same time. Neither of those things is at all likely. He's not really in line to join the line of succession. And we've never had more than one succession (by the Vice President) in a presidency. None of the later slots has ever reached the presidency by succession.

It is far more likely that he's elected president in 2020.

Brythan
  • 89,627
  • 8
  • 218
  • 324
  • Thank you very much for the detailed answer! However, suppose that the President, Vice President, the entire Cabinet, and the entire House of Representatives and Senate perish in an unfavorable event—but Bernie survives as the last Senator of the Legislative Branch of the gov't. Would he then be the de facto President? – Irregardless Aug 03 '17 at 03:28
  • 2
    @Irregardless Not in current law. He would still have to be put in the line of succession. The new Senate could select him as President pro tempore of the Senate prior to the House selecting a Speaker of the House. In the interim, there is no more line of succession. As the last Senator, he wouldn't be able to appoint himself President pro tempore of the Senate. He would need a quorum of fifty-one Senators. – Brythan Aug 03 '17 at 03:33
  • But, according to this politics stackexchange post, the Palm Sunday Compromise was passed with a quorum of 3-0. Couldn't Bernie just vote for himself and get himself elected? – Irregardless Aug 03 '17 at 03:38
  • 1
    See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Designated_survivor – Steve Melnikoff Aug 03 '17 at 13:58
  • "It seems unlikely that Bernie would be accepted as a Republican". Why not? Donald Trump (life long Democrat), was. :) – user4012 Aug 03 '17 at 14:22
  • To nitpiclk: "They might be better off hoping for resignations or deaths" - not quite complete. Senate may also have special elections if Republican President (Trump or successor) appoint any currently seating republicans for Executive posts. E.g. if Sessions resigns, another R senator may get picked - and may be from Democrat leaning state. – user4012 Aug 03 '17 at 14:24
  • 2
    A 2018 mid-term backlash result with Bernie being chosen as the Speaker of the House (Speaker does not have to be a member of the House, it can be anyone, apparently) would be about the only way to insert him near the top of the line of succession. Still wildly implausible, but that would be about the only way, legally, and less implausible than him getting appointed near the top by Trump or Pence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker_of_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives – PoloHoleSet Aug 03 '17 at 15:18
  • 2
    @user4012 - Trump was not a "lifelong Democrat'. Like with just about every other position possible, his history has him all over the board, depending on which way the wind was blowing on any particular day. – PoloHoleSet Aug 03 '17 at 15:20
  • 2
    @user4012 - Trump - Republican 1987 - 1999, Independent 1999-2001, Democrat 2001 - 2009, Republican 2009-2011, No party (Independent) 12/2011 - 4/2012, Republican 2012 - Present. 19 years Republican, 2.25 years Independent, 8 years Democrat. Hardly "lifelong Democrat." – PoloHoleSet Aug 03 '17 at 15:48
  • @user4012 If Trump appoints a Senator to the cabinet, the Senator has to resign first. – Brythan Aug 03 '17 at 17:05
  • @Brythan Can you reply to my abovementioned comment regarding the quorum? – Irregardless Aug 03 '17 at 18:44
  • @PoloHoleSet - ah, you're right. I wasn't aware of pre-1999 sting as a Republican. Still, he was a Democrat at the time he actively positioned himself to run for Presidency as a Republican, and, more importantly, expressed before election most positions that are closer to D than R on average (pro-spending, pro-taxes, pro-gay rights, heck he was quoted as pro-choice). After 2015/16, I would NOT discount Bernier running as a Republican as impossibility. – user4012 Aug 03 '17 at 19:07
  • 1
    @user4012 - I'd dispute his positions being more pro-Dem and GOP, to the degree that he wasn't all over the map on that, as well, but that's a side issue and probably something for chat if we wanted to go back and forth on that. I can see how a conservative would not consider him to be part of their gang, just a liberals would not, either. – PoloHoleSet Aug 03 '17 at 19:43
  • Re " never had more than one succession (by the Vice President) in a presidency": How about Ford? Appointed Vice President when Agnew resigned, then became President when Nixon resigned. – jamesqf Aug 04 '17 at 18:32
  • 1
    Ford only succeeded to the presidency once. And he was appointed VP (the only appointed VP to succeed to the presidency). We have never had a president by succession who later was replaced during the same term. – Brythan Aug 04 '17 at 22:12
  • @Brythan Hypothetically, if Bernie were to remain the sole living senator of the U.S. - with the President, VP, Cabinet all dead - would he be able to appoint himself to President pro tempore with a quorum of 1-0 (see previous comments regarding Palm Sunday Compromise's 3-0 quorum)? – Irregardless Aug 05 '17 at 02:10
  • 1
    There is no evidence that the Palm Sunday Compromise was legal. If it had been reviewed, it might well have been rejected. The point seems to have been to simply give an impression of legality so as to delay action and give people the chance for judicial review. The quorum requirement is constitutionally set, so as fig leafs go, it was a pretty small one. – Brythan Aug 05 '17 at 02:42