Read the Constitution - both can’t be from same state.
Substitute Romney and you might be on to something.
Didn’t know that. Thx
Like that means anything to those folks lmao
Read the Constitution - both can’t be from same state.
************
What is this Constitution thing to which you are referring? Yes, we used to have one back in the day but its since been abrogated. /sarc
Honestly, made me feel better - I had forgotten that tidbit.
> Read the Constitution - both can’t be from same state. <
The Constitution prohibits Electors from voting for two people from the same state. But the Electoral College would not be involved here.
So I think a VP Newsom would pass muster. (It would go against the spirit of the Constitution, but not against the actual wording.)
Absolutely false. Read it again.
Yeah a “fusion” heal the nation ticket. All the sheep will applaud.
A correction to my previous post. Presidential Electors cannot vote for two persons from the same state *as themselves *.
From Article II of the Constitution: “The electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves.”
Anyway, no Electors are involved here. So it could fly.
Constitution? The same Constitution that prevents Harris from EVER becoming President because she’s NOT a Natural Born Citizen? THAT Constitution?
> Read the Constitution - both can’t be from same state.
Maybe... but this is IMPORTANT
Not only that but once a recall is started, the election must carry on and the office holder subject to the recall election cannot accept another political office per California law.
FALSE!
I will do exactly what you suggest and refer to the Constitution of the United States. Here is the beginning of the text of Article 2 of the Constitution
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector. The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. .... Article II
Section 1
more stuff about how the electoral college worksSo, the famous "President and Vice President can't be from the same State thing that we always hear isn't the actual prohibition. The actual Constitutional prohibition is on the votes that electors may cast.
If Biden resigns the governing law is NOT Article 2, Section 1 - because we don't use the Electoral College to replace a missing VP, they are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate AND House.
The Constitutional text for the replacement of the Vice President is in the 25th Amendment. Again, I will quote the relevant portions:
25th AmendmentSo, there you have it. In the current case the rules governing the normal election of the Vice President have nothing to do with the process to replace one mid-term. It's an appoint and approval process, not the electoral college.
Section 1In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.
Section 2
Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.
So, yes, Kamala and Newsome could be POTUS and VPOTUS in the scenario the OP presented.
Let's get back to the commonly held myth that the POTUS and VPOTUS are prohibited by the Constitution from being from the same party. Even in the initial election (as shown above by the actual text of the Constitution) there is no such prohibition!
Let us imagine that for whatever reason that the Democrats had wanted another person from Delaware to serve as VP in 2016, and nominated them to the position.
Well, what that means is that only Delaware's electors are Constitutionally prohibited from voting for both Biden and the Dem VP from Delaware. That's because the Electoral College delegates are residents of Delaware too.
So, let us imagine then that the the Delaware electors (Delaware has 3 electoral votes) vote for Biden for President, and vote for a place-holder candidate for VPOTUS who is from another State, essentially "spoiling" their VPOTUS vote.
They have broken no Constitutional prohibitions.
The electors from all other states are free to vote for the Democratic ticket of POTUS candidate Biden of Delaware, and VP Candidate X of Delaware,
because they themselves (the electors) are not from Delaware.
There is NO Constitutional prohibition on them voting for those two candidates (POTUS and VPOTUS) from Delaware.
Because it's such a small state with so few EVs it is highly unlikely that the three missing VP votes for the Democratic VPOTUS candidate would change the result of the election.
So, that's the real story. But it' is often explained as "the President and Vice President" can't be from the same state. It's probably impractical for them to be from the same state, particularly if it's a large delegate rich State like California. Re-electing the Harris-Newsome duo would be very hard, because California (unlike Delaware in my example above, which has only 3 electoral votes) has 55 electoral votes! That would be a lot for the VPOTUS to sacrifice, and you might end up with no clear winner for VPOTUS, throwing it into the House.
Cheers!
That doesn't have anything to do with an appointed VP, though.
Actually, they can be from the same state. The restriction is that in the Electoral College, a state cannot vote for someone from their own state for both President and VP. So in an election, if both Harris and Newsome ran on the same ticket, the electors from California could vote for Harris or Newsome, but not for both. With a state with a large number of electors like California, that could result in the President and VP being from different parties. But in the case of an appointment, there is no Constitutional restriction.
They can be from the same state since no election is involved. The Constitution says that electoral college electors cannot vote for two candidates that are both from their state. So, even if both candidates were from the same state, only the electoral votes from that particular state would be involved.
I think they can. It's just that if they ran for re-election together, only one of them would be able to get the electoral votes from that state.
Yeah read your constitution like how a president and vice president have to be natual born citizens. I think its so cute that you really believe the Constitution is followed by the same people trying to get subvert it
I think you are correct. It’s going to be mittens. Hope he rots on Kolob.