Here’s another interesting electoral possibility:
As I said, there may very well be some Hillary die-hards among the Democrat electors.
There would be plenty of precedence for that.
In 1976, a Ford elector cast a vote for Ronald Reagan.
In 1988, a Dukakis elector cast a vote for Lloyd Benson.
In 1960, 1968, and 1972 there were unfaithful electors, each time betraying Richard Nixon.
Ronald Reagan’s 1 electoral vote in 1976 is a good example, because he was a candidate that created a huge following, and many said he was robbed of the nomination. The fight between Hillary and 0bama is not unlike Reagan vs. Ford. Except that the Clintons have way more die-hard loyalists than Reagan did in 1976.
So what is the likelihood that some Hillary loving electors vote for her instead of 0bama?
Pretty high. In fact, I’d say due to the circumstances, the chances for unfaithful electors this election is higher than just about any other in modern times. This takes into account the possibility of unfaithful McCain electors, too.
No matter what, at the very least, expect the losing candidate to have at least an unfaithful elector or two.
Perhaps if McCain loses, Mike Huckabee or even Ron Paul may get an elector. Hell, Ron Paul might get one either way. A rogue Ron Paul supporter in the GOP ranks could possibly lose a razor thin election for McCain. If it comes up 269 McCain, 268 0bama, 1 Paul, then the election goes to the House to decide, where they would almost certainly give it to 0bama. This is one of the side effects of Republicans staying home in 2006.
But I digress. Back to the strong likelihood of die-hard Hillary supporters among 0bama’s electors.
The above scenario could play out exactly the same, but instead of a McCain win being thwarted by a Ron Paul supporter, an 0bama win could be thwarted by a Hillary handful of rogue Hillary supporters. And this is where it gets interesting...
The Constitution says that if a majority is not reached by the electors, then the House decides the race... between — and only between — the top 3 electoral vote getters. This is because in America’s infancy, there were no political parties or primaries, and there were a handful of candidates vying for the presidency at once. So the role of the House was essentially to decide a run-off election between the top 3 candidates.
This means that if a couple 0bama electors throw his election by supporting Hillary instead, Hillary suddenly is in the running to become president, and it becomes possible to have a Clinton coup in the House.
Do you have a strong feeling as to how this thing is going to end up playing out? Especially of Obama is found to be unqualified?
And in 2004 a Kerry elector (from MN) voted for John Edwards.