Electoral shedding

[jackschmittusa]

I found this to be a very interesting read. Perhaps not a likely senario, but kind of an amazing possibility.

McCain could win

A more intriguing, and potentially more consequential, possibility is an elector "shedding" a vote to a 3rd candidate. In an election thrown to the House, the 12th amendment specifies to choose from the top three electoral vote recipients. In a tie, only Bush and Kerry will have electoral votes, Unless some elector decides to shed his vote, making the outcome 269-268-1. Why would an elector do this?

It's simple. Shedding a vote would still send the election to the House. Currently, the Republicans would handily win a vote between Bush and Kerry. Democratic electors thus have an incentive to get a third candidate on the House ballot -- particularly a centrist who could draw moderate Republicans into a coalition with the House Democrats to defeat Bush. To succeed, it would have to be a prominent moderate Republican, and it would have to be someone willing to attempt a revolt in the Republican party. It would almost have to be John McCain.

 

[chess9]

Yes, but the Dems wouldn't do it. They'd rather not play cutesy with the political process and let the Republicans go down in flames in '08, which is a distinct possibility if Bush is re-elected.

Interesting post. Thanks!

-Robert

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: chess9
Yes, but the Dems wouldn't do it. They'd rather not play cutesy with the political process and let the Republicans go down in flames in '08, which is a distinct possibility if Bush is re-elected.

Interesting post. Thanks!

-Robert

If they were acting in concert they wouldn't. But, since it would only take one elector, I find it a plausible scenario. The temptation for one individual to make history and change the world with a single action would be overwhelming.

 

[drewshin]

wow, cool. this is starting to get really interesting.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Wow.. if the EC can turn two terrible candidates into president McCain, I'll take back everything mildly derogatory I've ever said or thought about it

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Interesting.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: chess9
Yes, but the Dems wouldn't do it. They'd rather not play cutesy with the political process and let the Republicans go down in flames in '08, which is a distinct possibility if Bush is re-elected.

Interesting post. Thanks!

-Robert

I find it a lot more likely that the Dems will go down in flames in '08 if Kerry wins as opposed to the other way around. But that's just me. One positive to a Kerry victory is that there will be no 'Wife of Cigar Man' '08 bumper stickers.

 

[Luck JF]

Originally posted by: chess9
Yes, but the Dems wouldn't do it. They'd rather not play cutesy with the political process and let the Republicans go down in flames in '08, which is a distinct possibility if Bush is re-elected.

Interesting post. Thanks!

-Robert

Jeb Bush `08 !

 

[Fingolfin269]

I'm all about McCain for president. A lot of people say the same thing. Too bad those same people didn't say that 4.5 years ago.

 

[Gravity]

Mccain is too short to be pres. Bush barely qualifies.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
I'm all about McCain for president. A lot of people say the same thing. Too bad those same people didn't say that 4.5 years ago.

if he doesn't run in '08, I'm going to cry.

it's a shame that the people who should be president never are.

the big problem with McCain in '00 was the primaries... his main appeal is with moderate Republicans, independants, and conservative Democrates. 2/3 of his base wasn't elligible to vote for him during the primaries. plus, Bush and co did a bang-up slandering job against him.

 

[Crimson]

Yeah lets have the guy who produced the horribly failed McCain/Feingold campaign finance reform bill be President.. Maybe I can introduce a miserable failure of a bill and become President too!

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: chess9
Yes, but the Dems wouldn't do it. They'd rather not play cutesy with the political process and let the Republicans go down in flames in '08, which is a distinct possibility if Bush is re-elected.

Interesting post. Thanks!

-Robert

Wildly intriguing! A scenario I hadn't thought of. Tend to agree with Robert, though, the Dems won't mess and the 'Pubs would likely hold ranks, knowing that's all they needed to do to win.

Still . . .

 

[Crimson]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: chess9
Yes, but the Dems wouldn't do it. They'd rather not play cutesy with the political process and let the Republicans go down in flames in '08, which is a distinct possibility if Bush is re-elected.

Interesting post. Thanks!

-Robert

Wildly intriguing! A scenario I hadn't thought of. Tend to agree with Robert, though, the Dems won't mess and the 'Pubs would likely hold ranks, knowing that's all they needed to do to win.

Still . . .

If Bush has been SOOOOOOOO horrible, you'd think he would be a little lower in the polls don't you? I mean, Bush Sr. was a very popular President after the gulf war, and one vote on taxes got him thrown out.. You'd THINK that if what Bush Jr. is doing was SO horrible, he might actually be DOWN in the polls?

Here's a little reality check for all of you.. Bush still has the support of 50% of the country.. give or take a few percentage points.. Thats VASTLY better than Bush Sr. had after his term.

 

[conjur]

If people saw Bush without his makeup, I wonder what they would think of him.

And, Bush doesn't have 50% of the support of the country. He doesn't even have 50% of the support of registered or likely voters.

 

[IEC]

All I have to say is WOW. This could be HISTORY.