Here is a fascinating read on what would happen if John McCain and Barack Obama were to tie in the upcoming election which when you look at the scenarios involved it could happen:
A handful of battleground states are likely to determine the November 4 U.S. presidential election and it’s possible that Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama could split them in a manner that leaves each just short of victory.
If that happens, the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives would pick the president but it’s unclear whether Democrats would have enough votes to send Obama to the White House.
The House last decided an election in 1824. But the legal skirmishing and partisan rancor would probably resemble a more recent election — the 2000 vote in which Republican George W. Bush narrowly defeated Democrat Al Gore after a disputed Florida vote count and legal battle.
“This would be the seamy side of democracy, the lobbying and the money would be so intense,” said American University history professor Allan Lichtman.
In the United States, presidential elections are determined on a state-by-state basis rather than a nationwide popular vote. Each state, along with the District of Columbia, is allotted a number of votes in the Electoral College that correspond to the number of representatives it has in Congress. To become president, a candidate must win at least 270 electoral votes.
If McCain wins Virginia, New Hampshire, Florida and Ohio but loses Pennsylvania, Colorado, New Mexico and Iowa to Obama, both candidates could end up with 269 electoral votes.
Other, less likely scenarios — McCain losing Virginia and New Hampshire but winning Michigan, for example — also could result in a tie.
Under the U.S. Constitution, the House would then decide the election when it meets in January, with each state getting one vote — regardless of its size — if the chamber has to break a tie.
Democrats, who control the 435-seat House, outnumber Republicans in 27 state congressional delegations and could see that number rise in the November elections.
Republicans have a majority in 21 state delegations. Two states have an equal number of Republican and Democratic representatives.
Some members could feel pressure to vote for the other party’s candidate if he carried their state or district or if he won a clear margin of the national popular vote, said Northwestern University law professor Robert Bennett.
They would also be under extraordinary pressure from party leaders to stick together.
“There would be bargaining in that context and lots of room for rancor and bitterness. It would be a mess,” Bennett said.
The dispute probably would not be confined to Congress.
“Do you believe for one moment that this won’t end up in the courts?” Lichtman said. [Reuters]
Read the whole thing but did you know that in the case of a tie that the Senate chooses the Vice President? That would leave the possibility that John McCain could win the election but have Joe Biden as his Vice President because the Democrats control the Senate. If the House and Courts have not decided who the President is by January 20th Joe Biden would become President.
By the way anyone read this about Joe Biden’s remark about Katie’s Restaurant during the debate? Pretty darn funny.
If something like this was to play out it seems all the more reason, if the 2000 election wasn’t reason enough, to go to a popular vote election.
Popularity: 2%
9:19 am on October 5th, 2008 1
It’s not really that likely of a scenario this year. But if Obama wins the electoral college while losing the popular vote, I wonder if that would push Republicans into supporting abolishing the electoral college.
9:27 am on October 5th, 2008 2
It is not likely but looking at the scenario it is not an impossibility and it could happen.
The electoral college should have changed after the 2000 debacle so I doubt it will change if something similar happens to where Obama gets elected in a similar way.
10:58 am on October 5th, 2008 3
I think in 2000 people’s opinions of the electoral college had a strong tendency to coincide with which candidate they supported, and I bet that’s still true enough that only a similar scenario with an opposite result would spur widespread change. So sure, it would still be unlikely to see outright abolishment through a Constitutional amendment, but other solutions are possible. States could agree among themselves to apportion their electors by popular vote, or they could agree to award their electors to the winner of the national popular vote. Nebraska awards its electors by congressional district, for example, so it could likely split this year.
6:59 pm on October 5th, 2008 4
Constitution check …
In an electoral tie, the Congress would make their decision before the next session takes effect. Therefore, the Senate choosing Biden in an electoral tie is not a guarantee. With 49 Republicans, 49 Democrats, and 2 Independents (Lieberman and Sanders), Lieberman would choose Palin, while Sanders would choose Biden. The resulting tie means that Cheney gets to pick the winner.
An Obama-Palin administration? … that would be interesting.
7:26 pm on October 5th, 2008 5
According to 538, there’s a .49% chance of this happening. And I don’t want to imagine the riots and protests that would break out if something like 2000 should happen again.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
Also, NE splits their EV, and it’s looking like Obama will pick up the single Omaha vote. Even if the 269 split did happen, it would most likely be broken by the NE vote making it 270-268.
7:27 pm on October 5th, 2008 6
“Lieberman would choose Palin.”
I doubt it. Even he knows better…
8:52 pm on October 5th, 2008 7
@5 The Clam said:
“Lieberman would choose Palin.
I doubt it. Even he knows better…”
Are you sure? Lieberman’s priorities have always been to go with whoever promises to be the most supportive of Israel. Palin’s talking point of ‘never second guess Israel’ may put her in with Lieberman.
BTW. this 10 page article on John McCain in Rolling Stone Magazine may be swift-boating to some or informative to others.
9:03 pm on October 5th, 2008 8
If he or anyone else thinks that Israel would be safer with Palin in charge of anything, then I would be shocked.
And Palin does not have talking points. She has talking point Cliff Notes as evidenced in the debate she “participated” in.
9:47 pm on October 5th, 2008 9
I disagree on the popular vote thing.
I was probably with like mind back in 2000 until George Will pointed out the obvious: if we had had a popular vote system in 2000, the debacle of hanging chad counting in Florida —- would have been played out all over the country.
There were significant examples of voter fraud that came out across the nation then - and with a nation the size of the US - with so many cities and rural areas - there are going to be issues on voting day - any voting day - and if we have very close elections - which is the new trend in presidential elections in the US — and we have a popular vote - you will see legions of lawyers for both sides fanning out to get into nuke-war fights at polling booths all over the place - trying to get that handful of votes that pushes their person over the top.
Look what is going on in Ohio right now — after seeing Bush in the White House twice - they have made registering and voting as easy as it could possibly be - which means making it even easier to push voter fraud — and “non-partisan” groups are out rounding up homeless people - giving them free taxi rides, food, and comfort - as well as instructions on how to fill out the forms (and vote) —– and we all know that homeless people have a high percentage of mentally ill and/or substance abuse cases…..
With the trend of closer elections, there is a lot of dirty stuff going on in the key battle ground states.
If we had a popular system - with this trend of close elections - the dirt would be taking place all over the nation….
6:38 am on October 6th, 2008 10
I read that as What if McCain were to “Die” during the election.
7:47 am on October 6th, 2008 11
Seems just as likely as him winning…
9:38 am on October 6th, 2008 12
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
Every vote would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections.
The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes-that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
So there would never be a tie in the electoral vote, because the compact always represents a bloc consisting of a majority of the electoral votes. Thus, an election for President would never be thrown into the House of Representatives (with each state casting one vote) and an election for Vice President would never be thrown into the Senate (with each Senator casting one vote).
The National Popular Vote bill has passed 21 state legislative chambers, including one house in Arkansas, Colorado, Maine, North Carolina, and Washington, and both houses in California, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont. The bill has been enacted by Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. These four states possess 50 electoral votes - 19% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.
See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com