If Obama and Romney tie in the electoral college, then what? (Plus poll to FReep)

The Los Angeles Times ^ | July 11, 2012 | Jon Healey

[2ndDivisionVet]

The Times' Paul West offered a provocative bit of speculation Wednesday: There's a non-remote chance that the presidential election will end up in an electoral college deadlock, with President Obama and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney tied at 269.

Wrote West:

"All it would take for that to happen: President Obama carries most of the states he won in 2008, including Colorado and Virginia, swing states now rated as tossups. Mitt Romney holds the states that John McCain won last time, recaptures Republican Indiana and North Carolina and carries five swing states that are current tossups, Florida, Ohio, New Hampshire, Iowa and Nevada."

Granted, "all it would take" doesn't quite convey the difficulty each man faces in some of those states, but the outcome West predicted is at least plausible.

And if it happens, the Constitution calls for the House of Representatives to decide who'll be the next president. Barring a titanic shift in fortunes that enables the Democrats to reclaim that chamber, the House's GOP majority would hand the presidency to Romney.

There's a precedent for this: The House chose Thomas Jefferson at the turn of the 19th century and John Quincy Adams six elections later. And because the process is clearly laid out in the Constitution, it's likely to cause less grumbling among the electorate than, say, having the Supreme Court decide the outcome with a bizarre one-off ruling....

[LS]

You slightly misread the 54th Amendment. It says that the Gov of the 57th state shall assume the duties.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

The poll results are quite disappointing, but not unexpected. Brain dead citizens calling for the end of the Electoral College. They obviously never took Civics (is such a class still around) and do not understand the concept of federalism.

[EQAndyBuzz]

Would be hysterical if this happened and the House went back to the RATS.

[dvwjr]

Sorry, the 12th Amendment modified the Constitution to have the House of Representatives choose from the top THREE electoral vote recipients, not the original FIVE, if there is not a candidate with a majority electoral vote. The Senate would choose from the top TWO electoral vote recipients at that time.

dvwjr

[ex-Texan]

Look at this because it shows illegal searches are planned by Zero's Czars at airports. Smacks of "Big Brother:"

New TSA Scanners that Can Sense Drugs, What You Had for Breakfast

[pistolpackinpapa]

I’m not sure you really meant to say what your Posted Comment said. But, if so, the Democrat Underground must be missing you about now.

[ops33]

If I understand the Constitution correctly, it is the incoming House of Representatives, not the existing House.

[EQAndyBuzz]

“I’m not sure you really meant to say what your Posted Comment said. But, if so, the Democrat Underground must be missing you about now.”

Trust me, the DummieCrats want nothing to do with me. My point was 99.9999999% of the people on this forum want nothing to do with Romney, myself included. For long enough we have seen the establishment Republicans, the DNC, and the Democrat candidate pretty much box us in and foist some RINO on us because they know we will either stay home or vote for local candidates.

With all of this effort by the liberal establishment to put a RINO in front of the American people so he could be the libs whipping boy, to me it would be funny if Romney won. They would be looking for someone to blame as usual and as usual they would be totally oblivious to the fact that they are in fact to blame.

Unintended Consequence. The life of a liberal.