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

To: kabar
Cboldt: If the party gets a majority of electoral votes, it can replace a candidate that is unavailable.

kabar: True in most states but not all.

I would think allowances would have to be made in every state, should a party get enough votes to earn electors, but the presidential candidate was not available when the electors are required, by Federal law (3 USC 1), to cast ballots for a PERSON for the Office of President.

But I haven't studied all of the state laws. As you know, the general point I am making in these posts is that the deadlines for naming KERRY and BUSH do not mean a different DEM or GOP could be elected president this year, even if the ballots in all 50 states still recite KERRY and BUSH.

19 posted on 09/08/2004 2:42:51 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: Cboldt

Agree with your premise. Some states, like North Dakota, do require the Presidential candidate to name electors, but the vast majority use the political parties to name them, so the candidate can be replaced without too much effort. The names of the candidates on the ballots may be a different story.


20 posted on 09/08/2004 2:49:20 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | 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