The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)
Changes challenged by reversion may not be reinstated without affirmative consensus on the talk page
Violations of any of these restrictions should be reported immediately to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.
Editors who are aware of this topic being designated a contentious topic and who violate these restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.
With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:
Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions.
Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as obvious vandalism.
In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion.
Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance.
Whenever you are relying on one of these exemptions, you should refer to it in your edit summary and, if applicable, link to the discussion where consensus was clearly established.
Some presidents have multiple, or no VP, Jefferson had 2, Madison had 2, one was Jeffersons , Jackson had 2 and 1 of them was already VP, Tyler had none, Fillmore had none, Lincoln had 2, Johnson had none, Grant had 2, Arthur had none, Cleveland had 2, McKinley had 2, FDR had 3, and Nixon had 2 2600:6C4E:F7F:4AA:3D9E:C6A8:FEFF:BD6E (talk) 20:25, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mike Pence's presidential campaign didn't gain much traction, was suspended well before any of the caucuses & primaries, and is mainly notable for involving Pence. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 22:25, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know that from 2009-2011 he was the Chair of the HRC, and I wanted to add it but I can’t, in case this is seen by Wikimedia the ingormation is his Vice Chair was Cathy McMorris Rodgers he was preceded by Adam Putnam, and he was succeded by Jeb Hensarling 2600:6C4E:F7F:4AA:3D9E:C6A8:FEFF:BD6E (talk) 19:54, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pence didn't certify the 2020 election. He PRESIDED over certification.
Vice Presidents do not have the power to certify or refuse to certify electoral votes. Pence followed the law on 1/6, and his following the law made Trump mad, but Pence never had the option to do anything else (except not show up). Congress could vote to reject a state's electoral votes but the VP's role is just to stand there as the presiding officer. This is an important distinction. Leaving the description as it currently reads in the top section gives the impression that a future Vice President has the ability to make a different choice. They do not. Someone with appropriate edit access, please fix the article. Alvingreene2024 (talk) 16:16, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the Section: Governor of Indiana (2013-2017), in the second sentence of the second paragraph of Fiscal and economic policy, there appears to be missing an “of” between the words “repeal” and “an.” That is all. I do not believe this is deserving of a whole topic, but I am not versed in Wikipedia’s bureaucracy so I will leave this in your hands. Thank you for considering this change and thank you for always providing glorious truth for free! 2600:1001:B008:9727:ACE3:5660:21B1:EEA4 (talk) 17:50, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the paragraph below (emphasis added), the language and formatting very clearly express condemnation of Pence's creationist policy. Don't get it twisted, I personally vehemently disagree with creationism and would absolutely use this kind of tone if I were talking about Pence to a peer, but our feelings should not get in the way of a neutral tone. I take issue with the charged language. Saying he's "eroding" anything is very clearly a sentiment of feeling, especially when saying he's eroding the thing he would say he's trying to fix. The descriptor "established" is also pretty charged, being a clearly positive word. Finally the use of quotation marks doesn't really make sense. It really just seems like the quotation marks are meant to mock the ideas, or at least distance the writer from them, which is distinctly not neutral.
In a televised interview appearance with Chris Matthews, Pence advocated eroding the teaching of science in public schools by putting religious creationism on a par with established science, accepting "creationist beliefs" as factual, and thus "teaching the controversy" over evolution and natural selection, and regarding the age of the Earth, and letting children decide for themselves what to believe.
