Home » Forum » Author Hangout

Forum: Author Hangout

Bottom Flat View

What would happen if ...

REP 🚫

I am curious about something, and hope to get an answer without starting a political argument.

During a Presidential Election, the voters cast their ballots with their primary focus on the Presidential candidate, but they also elect a Vice-Presidential candidate; the two candidates are elected as a 'team'. Actually the voters specify the way their Electoral College Electors should cast the states' electoral votes for a Presidential candidate.

So assume a Presidential candidate has more than 270 Electoral College votes. However, the candidate dies prior to the Electoral College convening to cast their votes.

The laws of Presidential succession apply to a President who has been sworn into the position of President, so the laws have no bearing on how the Electoral College Electors cast their ballots. Since the voters elected two people as a Presidential team (i.e., a President and a Vice-President) and since the President can't serve, how would the Electoral College's Electors cast their votes?

1. Would the Electors be required to cast their votes for the deceased Presidential Candidate's running mate (i.e., the candidate for the Vice-President)? However, that candidate was not elected to be the President.

2. Would the Electors' votes be cast for one of the Presidential candidates who obtained less than 270 electoral votes?

Replies: Dominions Son Switch Blayde

Dominions Son 🚫

@REP

It makes a difference when he dies.

This ( https://www.vox.com/21502447/trump-biden-death-what-happens ) has a good review of the possibilities.

Replies: REP

REP 🚫

@Dominions Son

Thanks DS. Scenario 3 of your link is the time period I defined in the 3rd paragraph of my post - after the election and before the electoral votes are cast.

Based on the article, the ruling by the Supreme Court appears to say that the electors would not be bound by the results of the election and are not required to do as their party dictates.

If that is true, then the electors would be free to vote as their party directs or to do as their conscious dictates.

Replies: bk69

bk69 🚫

@REP

If that is true, then the electors would be free to vote as their party directs or to do as their conscious dictates.

s/ir conscious dictate/ highest bidder ask/

Replies: REP

REP 🚫

@bk69

s/ir conscious dictate/ highest bidder ask/

What is that supposed to mean?

Replies: madnige

madnige 🚫

@REP

In many (programming) editors, there is a Substitute command with syntax s/original/replacement/

You should be able to work it out from there.

Replies: REP

REP 🚫
Updated:

@madnige

You should be able to work it out from there.

Difficult to do since I am not familiar with the editors or with the command. It sounds similar to an 'If-Then-Else' command, but different. I did get the impression that bk69 was saying the electors would vote their conscious or sell the vote to the highest bidder. However, I did not want to put words in his mouth, so I gave him the option of clarifying his intent.

The first would be a supportable and defendable action. Selling their vote could result in legal consequences.

Replies: Dominions Son bk69

Dominions Son 🚫

@REP

It's a search and replace command for a text editor.

bk69 🚫

@REP

. I did get the impression that bk69 was saying the electors would vote their conscious or sell the vote to the highest bidder.

Actually, just the latter.

Didn't claim it was right, just what would happen.

Replies: REP

REP 🚫

@bk69

Actually, just the latter.

Didn't claim it was right, just what would happen.

I doubt that all electors would sell their votes. A number of electors would consider selling the votes and might do so. But many electors are dedicated to their party and would comply with whatever the party wanted them to do.

A state can punish unfaith electors, and there is a $1,000 dollar fine for doing so. Small potatoes compared to what an elector could make if he were to sell the electoral votes to a candidate. The Supreme Court indicated that the punishments might be increased in the future.

Replies: Dominions Son

Dominions Son 🚫
Updated:

@REP

A state can punish unfaith electors, and there is a $1,000 dollar fine for doing so.

A number of states have long had laws on the books to punish faithless electors. However, until very recently there was a serious open question as to whether or not these laws were constitutional.

In the 2016 Presidential election after it was clear Hillary wouldn't have enough EC votes to win, several of her electors across several states switched their votes to third party candidates. These were all in states with laws as described above.

The goal was two fold.

1. Get a court decision that the electors have discretion that the states can't legally bind.

2. Convince enough Trump electors to switch their votes to third party candidates to throw the election to congress.

#2 was an immediate failure.

#1 Reached the US Supreme Court just last year, and the court decided that the states do have the authority to bind the electors.

Replies: Ernest Bywater

Ernest Bywater 🚫

@Dominions Son

A number of states have long had laws on the books to punish faithless electors.

That, of course, begs the question of what is a faithless elector?

Take the 2016 election. Clinton got 61.73% yet only got 50% or better in 26 counties out of the 57 counties. So she won 45.61% of the counties. Yet the state laws gave her all 55 EC votes, despite only having won only 34 EC votes as based on the state percentage of the state's population that voted for her.

Thus it can be claimed that in California 21 Electors were faithless to the population of that state because the state government insisted they vote one way.

There are other states that do the same thing by giving all of the EC votes to the person with the most votes; New York 59.01%, Vermont 55.72%, New Hampshire 47.62%, Massachusetts 60.98%, Connecticut %54.57%, Rhode Island 54.4%, Pennsylvania 48$ - got lazy at that point and gave up, but if those states had divided the EC votes on the popular vote 9 of the Penn votes for Trump would've gone to Clinton and 43 of the Clinton votes in the other states would've gone to Trump.

It makes you wonder how serious the Democrats are about the popular vote being adhered to.

Replies: karactr Dominions Son

karactr 🚫

@Ernest Bywater

It makes you wonder how serious the Democrats are about the popular vote being adhered to.

Given their behavior over the past 60 odd years, I am thinking they would rather you didn't vote at all.

Replies: ystokes

ystokes 🚫

@karactr

Given their behavior over the past 60 odd years, I am thinking they would rather you didn't vote at all.

Then why is it that the GOP seem to pass laws denying peoples right to vote and calling for counting votes already cast be stopped?

Replies: Dominions Son irvmull sunseeker

Dominions Son 🚫

@ystokes

If local elections officials allow people to vote in ways that are not in compliance with state laws regarding how elections are to be run: Why should those votes be counted? Are they legally votes at all?

irvmull 🚫

@ystokes

Then why is it that the GOP seem to pass laws denying peoples right to vote and calling for counting votes already cast be stopped?

I have a similar question about Canada. I want to vote in their elections, but for some stupid reason, they won't let me. Why should my not being a Canadian citizen have any bearing on the matter?
Silly laws.

sunseeker 🚫

@ystokes

Why are the Dems deadset against requiring ID?

Irvmull - Canada's elections are over too quick to let anyone else vote in :)

Dominions Son 🚫

@Ernest Bywater

Thus it can be claimed that in California 21 Electors were faithless to the population of that state because the state government insisted they vote one way.

The electors are pledged to a specific candidate. Faithless means they voted for a different candidate, nothing more, nothing less.

There is no requirement in the US constitution that states select electors by vote at all. Your point is meaningless.

It's also not the case that electors are chosen and then directed how to vote based on the outcome of the election.

Each candidate selects a slate of potential electors for each state pledged to that specific candidate, then the election determines which slate is appointed as electors.

Even in Maine which is not winner take all you could have a faithless elector.

Replies: REP

REP 🚫

@Dominions Son

Each candidate selects a slate of potential electors for each state pledged to that specific candidate,

The individual states determine how their electors are to be selected.

I recall that in most states, it is the political party of the winning candidate that selects the electors - not the candidate. Although the candidate may have some input to the selection.

Switch Blayde 🚫

@REP

A dead person won the election for (I think is was) Congress.

He was on the ballot. He died of COVID but was still on the ballot. And he won. Since he was a Republican the Republicans choose his replacement.

Replies: palamedes

palamedes 🚫

@Switch Blayde

A North Dakota Republican died of covid-19 in October. He still won his election.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/a-north-dakota-republican-died-of-covid-19-in-october-he-still-won-his-election/ar-BB1aGzi2?ocid=uxbndlbing

It actually happens but I like this one the best

In 2010, Carl Robin Geary was elected as mayor of Tracy City, Tennessee. But he never got to be mayor because he had died of a heart attack before the election. Voters knew Geary was dead, but they still voted for him because they did not want his contender and incumbent mayor, Barbara Brock, to remain in office. Barbara got just 85 votes, while Geary got 268.Voters wanted Brock out of office so bad that one man stated he would vote for the deceased Geary if he ran for reelection. The loss meant Mrs. Brock had a very unique political profile. She was selected to become mayor in 2008 after the previous mayor died in office. Then she lost that seat to another dead man.

Replies: Dominions Son

Dominions Son 🚫

@palamedes

It actually happens but I like this one the best

For me, the ballot Tuesday had the Presidential race, the Local US HR district and a bunch of local offices. The local offices all had one person running with no opposition at all.

I wonder what would happen in a case like that, one candidate running unopposed and the candidate dies before election day?

BarBar 🚫

I much prefer this story (stories): (quoted from Wikipedia)

In 2014, the town of Idyllwild, California elected a golden retriever named Max II as mayor for life. In August 2014, seven-year-old Duke The Dog won an election and became the new mayor of Cormorant, Minnesota. In July 2018, a cat named Sweet Tart was elected mayor of Omena, Michigan.

Replies: Radagast

Radagast 🚫

@BarBar

Duke the dog was also elected Mayor in one of the Stupid Boy novels. In I Claudius Caligula appoints his horse to the senate. In real life many a horse's arse has been elected to office.

Radagast 🚫

Because of their tie in with Big Data I feel they want algorithms to replace voters. So they implemented it on Tuesday.

ystokes 🚫

Lets see, you have people being purged from rolls that shouldn't have been purged all done by the GOP, you had the Texas Gov. demand that only one collection box per county making people drive long distances, you have reduced polling places mostly in minority districts where people have to wait for 8+ hours to vote, you have them trying to stop counting mail-in ballots where a lot of them are from our troops overseas, in 2018 you had the GOP candidate for Gov. while being the Sec. of State doing a massive purge of voters right before voting began not giving time for those purged to contest or even knowing they were purged till they went to vote who were mostly minorities. I could go on and on.

Replies: REP

REP 🚫

@ystokes

I have to agree that our political process is flawed. However to be fair, neither party has clean hands. Over the years, both parties have accused each other of doing the same inappropriate things; in general, those accusations were true.

Replies: Dominions Son

Dominions Son 🚫

@REP

I have to agree that our political process is flawed.

The biggest flaw being that it is political. However, we haven't figured out how to do democracy without politics yet, and just about anything else would be even worse.

Topic Closed. No replies accepted.