In a tie, Edwards could be named Bush's VP

Seattle Post-Intelligencer ^ | October 11, 2004 | MATTHEW EISLEY

[TomGuy]

Could.
Won't.

Don't these reporter/writers have one functioning braincell? The Republicans have a solid majority in the House. Does this reporter/writer, Matthew Eisley, really think most would vote Edwards?

Eisley, you need a long vacation or a new profession. A prognosticator, you aren't.

[Steel Wolf]

Edwards as Bush's VP would only be comic relief for Bush and cabinet

Edwards - "What.. Another month long fact finding trip to ANWAR?! I've already told him, it's a big freakin desolate wasteland. It's cold, flat, frozen, full of oil, and useless. And I'm not even unpacked from my last trip to Antartica yet!! I hate this job! Gaaaaah!!"

[TomGuy]

Memory lapse. Forgot the Senate would choose the VP.

Edwards can't even win his home state, so it is highly doubtful he could muster a win in the Senate.

[Steel Wolf]

And then invited him to the State of the Union address, while sending Edwards to an "undisclosed location" that night.

President Bush - "And I'd also like to thank my distinguished Vice President, Mr. John Edwards, who is watching tonight from an undisclosed location, assuming that his motel does in fact have cable"

[hosepipe]

In that case Bush's life would'nt be worth a plugged nickle..
bet a secret service democrat would be the assasin...

[Parthalan]

Can you say undisclosed location. Permanently.

[Atlas Sneezed]

I highly doubt that there aren't at least a couple Dems in the Senate who would see the historical wisdom of ensuring that the VP was from the same party as the Pres, simply to reduce assassination incentives.

[dvwjr]

"Under the Constitution, the new House of Representatives would then elect the president by majority vote, with each state's House delegation getting one vote."

"The winner almost surely would be Bush, since the Republican Party is expected to control most delegations in the House, where it now has a 30-20 edge."

Well the Seattle Post-Intelligencer gets their information wrong again. If an electoral college tie of 269-269 votes did occur, then it would move to the Congress for the House of Representatives to resolve. There is would take 26 of the 50 State delegations to elect a President, however the current 108th House of Representatives is broken down by delegation as follows: 30 State delegations are Republican controlled, 15 State delegations are Democrat controlled, 1 State delegation is Socialist controlled and 4 State delegations are tied. The House of the 109th Congress would be the one to chose the President in the rare event of an electoral college tie, but not much of a change is expected except that Texas will go from the 'tied' catagory to that of being a Republican controlled delegation which would make the 109th House: 31(R), 15(D), 1(S), 3(tied).

U.S. House of Representatives
Division by State Delegation
108th Congress

State	Republicans	Democrats	Independents	Total
Alabama	5	2	0	7
Alaska	1	0	0	1
Arizona	6	2	0	8
Arkansas	1	3	0	4
California	20	33	0	53
Colorado	5	2	0	7
Connecticut	3	2	0	5
Delaware	1	0	0	1
Florida	18	7	0	25
Georgia	8	5	0	13
Hawaii	0	2	0	2
Idaho	2	0	0	2
Illinois	10	9	0	19
Indiana	6	3	0	9
Iowa	4	1	0	5
Kansas	3	1	0	4
Kentucky	4	2	0	6
Louisiana	5	2	0	7
Maine	0	2	0	2
Maryland	2	6	0	8
Massachusetts	0	10	0	10
Michigan	9	6	0	15
Minnesota	4	4	0	8
Mississippi	2	2	0	4
Missouri	5	4	0	9
Montana	1	0	0	1
Nebraska	3	0	0	3
Nevada	2	1	0	3
New  Hampshire	2	0	0	2
New  Jersey	6	7	0	13
New  Mexico	2	1	0	3
New  York	10	19	0	29
North  Carolina	7	6	0	13
North  Dakota	0	1	0	1
Ohio	12	6	0	18
Oklahoma	4	1	0	5
Oregon	1	4	0	5
Pennsylvania	12	7	0	19
Rhode  Island	0	2	0	2
South  Carolina	4	2	0	6
South  Dakota	0	1	0	1
Tennessee	4	5	0	9
Texas	16	16	0	32
Utah	2	1	0	3
Vermont	0	0	1	1
Virginia	8	3	0	11
Washington	3	6	0	9
West  Virginia	1	2	0	3
Wisconsin	4	4	0	8
Wyoming	1	0	0	1
Total:	229	205	1	435
Delegations:	30	15	1	4
50	Republican	Democrat	Socialist	Tied
No  Republicans	7
No  Democrats		8
No  Socialists			49
No  Tied				46
Majority:	26

Hope this helps,

dvwjr

[NewMediaFan]

Thanks for the info !

I'm hoping that Bush get 300+ electoral votes. Kerry/Edwards must be stopped in their tracks.

[Joe Miner]

The new senate, however it turns out won't be in session till 1/20/05.

The new Congress goes into session on the 3rd of January, the President is inaugurated on January 20th.

[Verginius Rufus]

Missouri's electoral votes in the 1820 election were counted, although it wasn't yet officially admitted, and Georgia's in 1868 were counted, although Congress later decided that it had not met the requirements for readmission (it wasn't officially readmitted until 1870).

If there is a tie in the electoral college, expect the 'Rats to bribe electors to vote for Kerry...remember how they were talking about that in 2000. One faithless elector could find himself a very wealthy man.

[AmishDude]

Yep. It is more likely to be a +2 or +1 pickup for the Republicans in the Senate. We get GA and SC for sure. They get IL. CO and OK are (finally) trending our way and NC looks to be another pickup. Things look optimistic in FL, and SD as well, though I would imagine Daschle can get enough zombies to vote his way.

[BigSkyFreeper]

Panic sets in on the Left like a Seattle rainstorm.