Posted on 08/17/2019 6:17:04 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
We’ve had one electoral college tie in our history, and that was almost an accident. It was Jefferson-Burr, who were the Democratic-Republican ticket.
This was before the 12th Amendment changed the procedure, requiring electors to identify specifically who they were voting for for President and Vice President. They just voted for two people, and whoever came in first was President and whoever came in second was VP.
One of the electors was supposed to vote for someone other than Burr, but they all thought some other elector was going to do it, so they tied. The House (which was Federalist) chose Jefferson.
Other than that, this has never happened. I don’t know why they think there is a “good chance” of it happening.
We’ve had one electoral college tie in our history, and that was almost an accident. It was Jefferson-Burr, who were the Democratic-Republican ticket.
This was before the 12th Amendment changed the procedure, requiring electors to identify specifically who they were voting for for President and Vice President. They just voted for two people, and whoever came in first was President and whoever came in second was VP.
One of the electors was supposed to vote for someone other than Burr, but they all thought some other elector was going to do it, so they tied. The House (which was Federalist) chose Jefferson.
Other than that, this has never happened. I don’t know why they think there is a “good chance” of it happening.
Good. I had forgotten, and possibly may never have known, that the House was Federalist.
In today’s environment, I expect that they would choose Burr because it would have been better for party politics, though worse for the country.
You are correct, and I doubt if more than 3-percent of Americans and accurately explain the House method of voting (it’s only state by state). It’s not each House member voting but the consensus of his state representation in the House.
A split Electoral College would lead to Civil War, I’m afraid.
I don’t think it will turn out that way, though. One thing the EC often does is exaggerate how great the margin of victory truly was. A 51-49 national vote win can become a 290-240 larger gap in the EC. So folks forget the national vote was razor thin.
The Supreme Court Justice who resigned was David Davis from Illinois. He was considered independent (although appointed by Lincoln).
Does your comment allude to 2ndDivisionVet?
:)
Thank you. The name rings a bell. I do not believe that I ever knew that he was a Lincoln appointee.
You either look things up or have a very good knowledge of history—both of which are to be applauded.
I’m mixing entertainment, education, and working on a report that is due Tuesday noon. Not the ideal way to spend Saturday night, but it beats surfing the net.
I was going to point out the alludes/eludes flaw but did not want to be accused of being school marmish.
Yeah. 500 to 32
We see this type of article very four years to remind us of this supposed scary Constitutional thing. Just get out there and vote in droves for our candidate and the Constitution will take care of the rest.
The little voting applet is totally rigged. I tested it. It is designed to make votes show 2:1 in favor of abolishing the electoral college.
How about we abolish the free press and the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment while we’re at it?
The left keeps banging a drum that is a call to war, but I don’t think they’re going to like it when it comes.
It would be bad for democracy, which would be good: This is a Constitutional, Representative Republic.
> There is a very good chance that the Electoral College will split evenly on Election Day
There is almost zero chance of this. It’s technically possible, but that’s about it.
Which states are Dems going to win that they didn’t pick up in 2016, anyway? Things are not looking good for them anywhere but their own strongholds.
Seriously? Obscure? It’s iin the plain text of the Constitution which is the size of a pamphlet, but 10,000 volumes in a legal library, or some rider to an omnibus bill.
Hamilton basically managed it. (Another reason Burr wanted to duel with him.) He called the Federalists into caucus and told them, “I disagree with Mr. Jefferson, but I respect Mr. Jefferson, and that’s more than I can say for Mr. Burr.”
Partisan Media Shills update.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.