Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: PlushieWithTeeth
So, the Dems could switch out Hillary for Kerry at any time? His campaign seems to be in a avalanche-type mudslide lately. How would this affect overseas voters?

Electors aren't bound to vote for the candidate who won their state. So yes, Kerry could drop out two weeks from now, and Hillary could step in, and whether she got on the ballots or not the Kerry electors could just choose Hillary.

That being said, a replacement candidate would never pull off a win. Too many people would be confused, angry about it, or just plain apathetic.
21 posted on 09/01/2004 3:37:23 PM PDT by swilhelm73 (There is no safety for honest men but by believing all possible evil of evil men. --Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: swilhelm73

Speaking of deadlines for getting on the ballot, will W be on the Alabama, California, and (I think one more) state ballots? The last I knew the convention was so late that the deadline had passed.


24 posted on 09/01/2004 3:39:37 PM PDT by Ingtar (Understanding is a three-edged sword : your side, my side, and the truth in between ." -- Kosh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

To: swilhelm73
Electors aren't bound to vote for the candidate who won their state.

Not by federal law. But some states do require their electors to vote for the candidate that they were selected to vote for. On the first ballot, anyway.

Enough that simply having all the Rat electors switch isn't a winning option.

And replacing a name on the ballot is something that cannot be done in all states legally or extra-legally.

IMO, the Toricelli option ended when Kerry threw that sloppy salute in Boston the other week.

Still, if Bush carries 40+ states, it won't matter what sort of nonsense the Dems try.

If it's not close, they can't cheat. (Good book!)

31 posted on 09/01/2004 3:46:00 PM PDT by jdege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

To: swilhelm73

Interesting point. Kerry is definitely in trouble - and the Clintons may very well have their hand in his getting nominated in the first place, knowing full well what a total washout he would be.

For the reasons you mention, I seriously doubt the Hildebeast would take the risk of jumping in if Kerry drops out. They might be very pleased to put in a potential rival for her majesty's 2008 bid, though - knowing he would lose. Two birds with one stone.


47 posted on 09/01/2004 4:20:57 PM PDT by Bogolyubski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

To: swilhelm73
That being said, a replacement candidate would never pull off a win. Too many people would be confused, angry about it, or just plain apathetic

That would depend on the reasons (real or merely "given") for the replacement. An unfortunate illness, or worse, could gain sympathy votes, as it did in Minnesota and Missouri in recent years. Both times in favor of the 'Rats.

66 posted on 09/01/2004 4:37:09 PM PDT by El Gato (Federal Judges can twist the Constitution into anything.. Or so they think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson