Thread Rating:
10-12-2012, 10:54 PM
270towin.com is now showing the electoral raise in a virtual tie. 201-191. a less than 5% lead for NObama...... This is near the margin of error of many polls (3-5%). But the interesting thing is that the site gives all the winning combinations possible for each candidate with remaning states, and lists 32 combinations that would lead to a 269-269 tie. (171 winning combinations for Obama, 161 for Romney) A tie results in a vote in the House of Representatives (being the true representation of the people as designed by the founders). This would give Romney the win, without a doubt. What concerns me though, is this....
Rogue Electoral votes.
In previous and recent elections we have seen electors vote erroneously as well as with intention, for someone other than the winner of their state. In 2004, a vote was mistakenly given to John Edwards for president. Instead of John Kerry. That would be catastrophic in a tie. In 2000, 1 elector obstained (i think out of protest because of the florida results).
This leads me to the question...... This is not a debate about the need for or abolishment of the electoral college itself, but about the electors. Should electors be bound by law and criminal statues, to vote for the candidate that won their state or the manner prescribed by state? a 269-269 tie is very possible. I believe that romney winning Florida, NC, Ohio, Iowa, and Nevada will give him 269. Thats very possible. He's up in 3 of the 5 I believe and virtually tied in two.
Whats also interesting to me is that Biden being senate president, oversee the ballot certification and I suppose counts the votes. if he loses, it'll be amazing to watch him, like gore... declare the winner. Gore handled it with absolute class, and considering the historic fight preceeding it, it was nice to see his professionalism. He had to take action while proceeding, to calm protests.
Rogue Electoral votes.
In previous and recent elections we have seen electors vote erroneously as well as with intention, for someone other than the winner of their state. In 2004, a vote was mistakenly given to John Edwards for president. Instead of John Kerry. That would be catastrophic in a tie. In 2000, 1 elector obstained (i think out of protest because of the florida results).
This leads me to the question...... This is not a debate about the need for or abolishment of the electoral college itself, but about the electors. Should electors be bound by law and criminal statues, to vote for the candidate that won their state or the manner prescribed by state? a 269-269 tie is very possible. I believe that romney winning Florida, NC, Ohio, Iowa, and Nevada will give him 269. Thats very possible. He's up in 3 of the 5 I believe and virtually tied in two.
Whats also interesting to me is that Biden being senate president, oversee the ballot certification and I suppose counts the votes. if he loses, it'll be amazing to watch him, like gore... declare the winner. Gore handled it with absolute class, and considering the historic fight preceeding it, it was nice to see his professionalism. He had to take action while proceeding, to calm protests.
![[-]](https://bluegrassrivals.com/forum/images/lifestyle/collapse.png)
10-13-2012, 06:19 PM
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charter...11-27.html
AMENDMENT XII
Passed by Congress December 9, 1803. Ratified June 15, 1804.
Note: A portion of Article II, section 1 of the Constitution was superseded by the 12th amendment.
The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; -- the President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; -- The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. [And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. --]* The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
*Superseded by section 3 of the 20th amendment.
AMENDMENT XII
Passed by Congress December 9, 1803. Ratified June 15, 1804.
Note: A portion of Article II, section 1 of the Constitution was superseded by the 12th amendment.
The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; -- the President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; -- The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. [And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. --]* The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
*Superseded by section 3 of the 20th amendment.
10-13-2012, 10:52 PM
^ That is correct. I should have added that. I was thinking about the President only. Thank you for the clarification. In addition we can look to the 12th amendment for further instruction.
and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice.
Not sure I understand how that would work. Just one vote per state. What happens if there's an even number of democrats and republicans? Controlling party of congress decides?
I also would like to point out another important idea. The 12th amendment prohibits Clinton from ever being VP, as some have talked about in the past, with a Clinton-Clinton ticket. The 12th amendment states that no person constitutionally ineligible to hold the office of president, shall be vice president.
I believe also that the president and vice president cannot be residents of the same state.
and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice.
Not sure I understand how that would work. Just one vote per state. What happens if there's an even number of democrats and republicans? Controlling party of congress decides?
I also would like to point out another important idea. The 12th amendment prohibits Clinton from ever being VP, as some have talked about in the past, with a Clinton-Clinton ticket. The 12th amendment states that no person constitutionally ineligible to hold the office of president, shall be vice president.
I believe also that the president and vice president cannot be residents of the same state.
10-13-2012, 11:10 PM
LWC Wrote:If I am not mistaken it has been done before.
1824.. but it wasn't from a tie. No one recieved the majority needed. Andrew Jackson won the most votes and electoral votes initially. But not enough to seal the deal.
10-13-2012, 11:24 PM
Yes. He nearly became the president. Recieving the 3rd most ballots. He then was involved in a controversial compromise.
10-14-2012, 03:16 AM
One thing is for sure, in the event of a tie, all HELL will break loose.
10-14-2012, 10:24 AM
RunItUpTheGut Wrote:One thing is for sure, in the event of a tie, all HELL will break loose.
Its very very possible. I'm unsure if VP Biden would accept the office under Romney if it were to happen. There's extensive debate as to whether the VP is a cabinet position, and whether not he's in the executive branch or legislative.... (since he's president of the senate, presides over it, can raise objections, offer amendments, and vote during the event of a 50-50 split). Romney most likely could 'fire' him if it were to happen and then install a VP. I think in the event of a tie though, lobbying would be seen at a level never known before.. to sway votes.
10-14-2012, 10:20 PM
ronald reagan Wrote:Its very very possible. I'm unsure if VP Biden would accept the office under Romney if it were to happen. There's extensive debate as to whether the VP is a cabinet position, and whether not he's in the executive branch or legislative.... (since he's president of the senate, presides over it, can raise objections, offer amendments, and vote during the event of a 50-50 split). Romney most likely could 'fire' him if it were to happen and then install a VP. I think in the event of a tie though, lobbying would be seen at a level never known before.. to sway votes.
:yikes: Billions would change hands, possibly trillions.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)
