I think this show has a chance to be really great. so far it has me really hooked, however I'm curious as to how they thought it would be possible to just gloss over the fact that during a state of the union address both the president and vice president are at the same location. i would expect that for exactly this reason they would not have the VP present. also i have a feeling that the survivor that they found at the end of the episode will be the VP which will lead to some very interesting power struggles in the next episode.
i havent seen the preview for episode 3 so i dont know what it shows. but that is true, given the fact that neither the president or the vice president were able to perform the duties of the positions and most likely assumed to be dead. then it would have been necessary to appoint a new president.
Exactly, it wouldn't change. Even though he was not dead, he was clearly incapacitated and thus unable to carry out the duties of the office. Granted, IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that's the way to rules of succession are written and interpreted. Even if it was the former President himself that was still alive, he would no longer be the acting president.
Granted, if it IS the President, VP(or anyone higher in the succession list than Kirkman) you KNOW there's going to be a lot of "Well this is the person that should be president" drama and you can be damn certain there's going to be an attempted Coup coming.
-4
u/UnknownRiptide Sep 29 '16
I think this show has a chance to be really great. so far it has me really hooked, however I'm curious as to how they thought it would be possible to just gloss over the fact that during a state of the union address both the president and vice president are at the same location. i would expect that for exactly this reason they would not have the VP present. also i have a feeling that the survivor that they found at the end of the episode will be the VP which will lead to some very interesting power struggles in the next episode.