@SAUNDERS Yes: Per the DNC rules, if the nominee resigns, becomes incapacitated or dies, the DNC can just select a candidate to take the place of the original nominee.
Newsom would almost certainly be the choice. Even so, forcing them to do it that way damages their chances more than having Biden impeached, given that the Senate will not vote to convict.
@SAUNDERS Of course the opposition will make an argument. I've heard every one of them, and they're absolute GARBAGE. Laughably so.
Read Federalist #84, then research who wrote it, and that person's opinions on the proper authority of the US government under the Constitution, and how the Federalist papers were used to get the Constitution ratified.
After having done that, if you want to make an argument against what I've said is the proper way to interpret the Constitution, then do so. I'll respond to it.
@SAUNDERS It's beyond rational dispute. The burden of proof can only rightly rest on whomsoever claims any right or authority to rule over others. For that reason, your request for proof is out of line.
@SAUNDERS Amendments Nine and Ten make it clear that ALL individual rights not explicitly limited (in whatever way) by the EXPLICITLY ENUMERATED authorities by the clauses of the Constitution are rights that the Federal government has no authority to infringe.
Alexander expressly enunciated the same doctrine in Federalist #84, written and published before the Bill of Rights was even written. And the Federalist Papers, collectively, served as the basis by which the several States decided what the governing contract they were being asked to ratify would mean, were they to ratify the proposed Constitution.
The truth is that we never did: Having any monopolies at all is logically inconsistent with a "free market." Especially when the monopoly in question happens to be the provider of justice and security.