Should sitting presidents be transporting their chosen candidates on AF1?

2016-07-05T04:18:05-04:00

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 5 at 2016 5:05 AM

2016-07-05T05:05:11-04:00

SPC Kirk Gilles. I understand the possible desire to characterize this use of government resources as a government subsidy of a private political campaign. But, as far as I am concerned, this may be more a matter of legitimate means to pursue legitimate business and security needs of the sitting president. In any case, I would not be keen to legislate or otherwise throw a barrier in the way of the use of AF1 for any mission requiring support of the legitimate travel and business needs of the sitting president. Warmest Regards, Sandy

Response by Capt Jeff S. made Jul 5 at 2016 5:24 AM

2016-07-05T05:24:51-04:00

Once a political party member becomes President, he is not supposed to campaign for members of his party. He is in a separate Branch of Government and is supposed to act neutral, not partisan, as he must work with members on both sides of the aisle. But I don't think Obama paid any attention to what he was being taught during his orientation; he had other things in mind -- like shredding our Constitution, diminishing America's standing in world affairs, doing away with our borders, bankrupting this nation, shrinking out military, taking away our guns and means of resisting an out of control, tyrannical gov't that no longer listens to its people.

Am counting the hours till this treasonous usurping FRAUD is gone from the White House. That place is too good for him, and when Trump gets in there, he will bring back an air of dignity and class to the White House. AAAAND! We will have a First Lady we can be proud of... instead of a First Lady that isn't proud of her country! Can virtually guarantee that the White House staff will get smaller as Trump begins cutting the dead weight out of the Executive Branch. He will set an example for Congress to follow... but will they?

Response by SSgt Jim Gilmore made Jul 5 at 2016 6:26 AM

2016-07-05T06:26:54-04:00

It is permissible. Unfortunately, it is the world's largest billboard for a sitting POTUS running for re-election. Transporting candidates is a tradition allowed as the party in power using the plane for political gain (the candidates) is liable for all transportation costs. I would also like to see the dual use flights, political and Presidential business eliminated. If the use is even partly political, the political party in power pays ALL associated cost of the use of the plane.

Response by TSgt Joe C. made Jul 5 at 2016 7:04 AM

2016-07-05T07:04:34-04:00

Nope.

Response by Sgt Tom Cunnally made Jul 5 at 2016 7:07 AM

2016-07-05T07:07:27-04:00

Obama says Hillary was an outstanding Secretary of State and his friend. But flying around on Air Force together is not what voters like to see since tax payers pay for Air Force One.

Will the Clintons pay for this flight??

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 5 at 2016 7:08 AM

2016-07-05T07:08:09-04:00

When the President uses Air Force One for political trips, he or his party pay an amount equal to a commercial ticket for the same route, if it is known. He would also pay for food, lodging and other costs during the trip. In this case, either the Democratic Party or Sec. Clinton’s campaign will be paying these costs.

Response by SSG Carlos Madden made Jul 5 at 2016 7:08 AM

2016-07-05T07:08:11-04:00

Hi Tom,
Check out this discussion too:
https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/should-sitting-presidents-be-transporting-their-chosen-candidates-on-af1

Should sitting presidents be transporting their chosen candidates on AF1? | RallyPoint

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made Jul 5 at 2016 7:17 AM

2016-07-05T07:17:04-04:00

No, were the ones footing the bill for fuel.

Response by Sgt Tom Cunnally made Jul 5 at 2016 7:26 AM

2016-07-05T07:26:41-04:00

They are flying together to Charlotte NC where Obama will give a speech to praise Hillary but with many wondering if this may be misusing AF 1?? I don't recall other Presidents flying presidential candidates on AF1 but Obama is not like any other Presidents since he likes to do his own thing that we may or may not approve of. But then again we are just citizens so "What difference does it make" to steal a quote from Hillary

It is unclear if Hill & Obama will continue to use AF 1 for the rest of the Democrat campaign??

Response by SFC Ken Owens made Jul 5 at 2016 8:37 AM

2016-07-05T08:37:15-04:00

They already get Secret Service protection so why not.......

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 5 at 2016 8:50 AM

2016-07-05T08:50:32-04:00

The notion that presidents are not supposed to campaign for their party's candidate is pure make believe that has no basis in our constitution or political tradition. Here's what Reagan said in May 1988:

"At the end of a 20-minute speech extolling his own record, Reagan said:
``I`d like to take a moment to say just a word about my future plans. In doing so, I`ll break a silence I`ve maintained for some time with regard to the presidential candidates.
``I intend to campaign as hard as I can. My candidate is a former member of Congress, ambassador to China, ambassador to the United Nations, director of the CIA and national chairman of the Republican Party. I`m going to work as hard as I can to make Vice President George Bush the next president of the United States.`` Reagan did add to his prepared text before leaving the fundraising dinner for 3,000 Republican contributors-``On to New Orleans, on to the White House``-as he stood with Bush, the two of them holding their hands aloft.

Let's stop proclaiming major butthurt every time Obama does something every president before him also did and acting like it's some new unique violation of the constitution.

The President being neutral irt his party's candidate? Please. The POTUS is the de facto leader of his party. But then I guess the same people who think that the POTUS should be neutral think Speaker of the House Ryan shouldn't favor republican candidates because he is now the Speaker of the whole House, not just the republicans. Right.

Response by MSgt Michael Smith made Jul 5 at 2016 9:07 AM

2016-07-05T09:07:12-04:00

Every election season this comes up. The truth is that the President is a political figure, and it is a longstanding practice for the President to vigorously campaign for the candidate they support. The President travels on Air Force One --like it or not, that is the President's aircraft and he can use it for whatever he needs to do, whether that is vacation, campaigning, or Presidential duties. If the President is campaigning for Hillary, he is going where she is going, so what is the harm in her being on there as well. Like I said, this is the way every President has done it since Air Force One started flying.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Jul 5 at 2016 9:12 AM

2016-07-05T09:12:55-04:00

FEC rules specify that when there is any political activity at a particular stop, all travel to that destination must be reimbursed.

Response by SFC Jim Ruether made Jul 5 at 2016 10:42 AM

2016-07-05T10:42:13-04:00

Absolutely not and HRC's campaign should foot the entire bill of $206,365 per hour of operation herself instead of splitting the cost with the administration? I never gave her or Obama permission to use AF1 in this way. Maybe they should cut Donald a check for half the cost so the playing field is even!

Response by SGT Brian Wall made Jul 5 at 2016 11:11 AM

2016-07-05T11:11:21-04:00

Absolutely not. This is a direct conflict.

Response by PO3 Sandra Gomke made Jul 5 at 2016 11:51 AM

2016-07-05T11:51:04-04:00

I would much rather not be the one footing the bill. But, as pointed out, it has been the President's prerogative to give rides to his chosen candidate. I'm hoping the note that the candidate should be reimbursing "us" for the flights holds true. That sounds fairer to the American people. However, we are talking about politicians here. We the people don't really seem to matter to them.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 5 at 2016 11:57 AM

2016-07-05T11:57:56-04:00

When POTUS is not using AF1 in an official capacity he is charged for the flight, so there shouldn't be an issue with him using AF1 and all other Presidents have done the same.

Response by SGT Jerrold Pesz made Jul 5 at 2016 11:58 AM

2016-07-05T11:58:24-04:00

Of course not but corruption just comes naturally for Obama and Clinton.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 5 at 2016 12:40 PM

2016-07-05T12:40:52-04:00

Only not to conservative Republicans when it's a Democrat transporting a Democratic candidate.

Absolute NON-ISSUE, but with Hillary not being indicted for anything the right wingers some bullshit to cry about.

Response by Capt Walter Miller made Jul 5 at 2016 1:14 PM

2016-07-05T13:14:55-04:00

Response by SPC Kirk Gilles made Jul 5 at 2016 4:48 PM

2016-07-05T16:48:09-04:00

The notion that the government property is His for his sole edification is not comforting. The plane and the money don't bother me as much as the message, the full weight of government, all its resources brought to bear to crush an opponent. Bernie's not out yet. Can he get a ride too?

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Jul 5 at 2016 5:19 PM

2016-07-05T17:19:44-04:00

Been done as long as I've been on this Earth and I'm a 58 year old Grandpa. The Requirement for Security of the CINC and the "Football" that goes with him pretty well dictates this Scenario.

Response by SSG Roger Ayscue made Jul 6 at 2016 2:20 AM

2016-07-06T02:20:59-04:00

When she is on board it becomes "Broomstick One" And I as a taxpayer am galled and disgusted that I have to pay for her air transport..

Response by TSgt J.L. Brown Jr made Jul 31 at 2016 5:50 PM

2016-07-31T17:50:27-04:00

No, that's like belonging to a union, and the union uses your dues to pay for Benny's. they should park AF1, Obama being so concerned with climate change, they should cut the AC off, train sport them in a car with no AC, turn off the AC in the white house