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

Skip to comments.

More And More People Are Worrying About The Electoral College Nightmare Scenario
Business Insider ^ | 10/22/2012 | Walter Hickey

Posted on 10/22/2012 7:11:49 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

There's been a lot of chatter lately about the plausible scenario that Obama and Romney tie in the electoral college.

The odds aren't that low.

Essentially, here's what would happen.

Provided that there are no faithless electors — people selected for the Electoral College who disregard the popular vote in their state and vote for the opponent — the election would be decided in Congress, when each state delegation votes and allocates one vote to a candidate.

The first one to amass 26 votes wins.

Here's the issue a lot of people are talking about. What if Obama wins the popular vote and the electoral college is tied?

Based on the breakdown of state delegations, and provided there aren't too many unexpected results on November 6 with congressional elections, Mitt Romney would win the vote in the house of Representatives.

David Frum at The Daily Beast raises that question:

"This moves us beyond Bush v. Gore territory into someplace even more contested and more frightening. And whereas 2000 was a low-intensity election involving a Democratic not hugely beloved by his own party base, a House contest in 2012 would unleash every passion in the American political system."

If Obama wins the popular but ties the electoral, would it even be feasible for the House of Representative to appoint the loser of the popular vote to president, politically speaking?

That would make the second Republican elected president in four cycles who lost the popular vote. And with the congressional approval rating at an insulting 10%, would the result be considered legitimate?

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: electoralcollege
THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE NIGHTMARE SCENARIO:


1 posted on 10/22/2012 7:11:53 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The chances of Obama winnng the popular vote are slim and none.

The chances of him winning the electoral college are not great, but very possible.


2 posted on 10/22/2012 7:14:08 AM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It is possible but I don’t think an Ohio/Romney, Virginia/Obama combination is very likely.


3 posted on 10/22/2012 7:15:56 AM PDT by FewsOrange
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

To my knowledge there has never been a tie in the electoral college in more than 200 years. Possible yes, but I just worry more that Obama is voted out period.


4 posted on 10/22/2012 7:16:29 AM PDT by The Great RJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

RE: The chances of him winning the electoral college are not great, but very possible.

______________________

AND *THAT* IS THE NIGHTMARE SCENARIO.

WITH THAT, WE GET ANOTHER 4 YEARS OF OBAMA EVEN IF MOST AMERICANS DON’T WANT HIM AS PRESIDENT.


5 posted on 10/22/2012 7:17:19 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It is a “nightmare scenario” only if Obama is re-elected POTUS.


6 posted on 10/22/2012 7:19:44 AM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Media’s dream come true


7 posted on 10/22/2012 7:20:25 AM PDT by ari-freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

Statistically possible but as probable as a comet hitting the US on election day.

Figure most of the states where His Excellency is more than a point below 50% will go for the challenger. Being undecided now means they cannot stand the jerk and will either not vote or vote for Romney. That would make it not so close in the final tally.

By my reckoning, if the election were held today, Romney would garner at least 275 votes so while it is close, it is good by to his majesty. Following the bunch out of DC will be like the guy who cleans up after the circus parade has gone by.


8 posted on 10/22/2012 7:20:29 AM PDT by Mouton (Voting is an opiate of the electorate. Nothing changes no matter who wins..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
So little time, so much to redistribute.
9 posted on 10/22/2012 7:20:35 AM PDT by carumba (The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made. Groucho)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

How can there be a tie in the Electoral College when there are 535 votes? You can’t divide 535 and come out with an even number or am I missing something?


10 posted on 10/22/2012 7:20:58 AM PDT by anoldafvet (One million people attended Obama's inauguration, 14 of them missed work)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Interesting map...my response is three-fold: to make sure I can find this map for comparison after Election Day and to point out there are articles on the current first page of FR that call both CO and VA into question for the blue coloration on this map. Thirdly, the map is interesting when considering the land mass differences between red and blue.


11 posted on 10/22/2012 7:21:13 AM PDT by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anoldafvet

DC gets 3 EVs


12 posted on 10/22/2012 7:23:33 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca
The chances of Obama winnng the popular vote are slim and none.

Right.

Most polls show him in the 43% to 47% range. Unless a third entity is syphoning off massive numbers, Romney seems to be polling in the 47% to 53% range.

Regardless, the presidency is based on States, not general national population. That is why the Electoral College, as convoluted as it seems, was established -- to provide states will lesser populations a voice and keep them from being muted by states with larger populations.

If the 'popular vote' movement ever took over, states like NH, DE, VT, NM, WY, MT, and similar low-population states would have almost negligible involvement or influence in national elections. Instead, NYC, LA, Denver, Chicago, Phoenix, and other cities with large populations would 'own' the elections. Of course, most liberals live in -- those large cities.

Every day we should thank G_d that our Fore Fathers were more intelligent than most of those trying to run things currently.
13 posted on 10/22/2012 7:27:45 AM PDT by TomGuy (Dukakis is to tank as Obama is to binder & Big Bird)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy

Not only does the EC recognize state sovereignty,
it protects against voter fraud.

No matter how much fraud is perpetrated in the high population cities, they can only affect the number of EVs that their state has, not the entire country.


14 posted on 10/22/2012 7:30:11 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

What about those states, Maryland I believe was one, that vowed to cast their electoral votes for the national popular vote winner? (I suspect that was only if it worked out for the dims.)


15 posted on 10/22/2012 7:30:20 AM PDT by The Sons of Liberty ("Get that evil, foreign, muslim, usurping, gay commie bastard out of MY White House!" FUBO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I won’t worry about it unless or until it happens. Get out the vote and make sure it doesn’t.


16 posted on 10/22/2012 7:33:56 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anoldafvet
How can there be a tie in the Electoral College when there are 535 votes? You can’t divide 535 and come out with an even number or am I missing something?

Partly because some states allow their EV to be split up and partly because the non-state of DC has 3 EVs.
17 posted on 10/22/2012 7:33:57 AM PDT by TomGuy (Dukakis is to tank as Obama is to binder & Big Bird)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
What is frightening is this author's premise. He is worried that people would not accept a constitutionally proscribed process as “legitimate”. That is what is frightening to me.
18 posted on 10/22/2012 7:34:22 AM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anoldafvet
535 + 3 = 538 = possible tie of 269/269.

Simplest solution would be to add one more congressional seat. Better solution is for Americans to wake up and realize that even if they are a taker, there is more to loot from a growing prosperous country than from one where poverty keeps being divided.

19 posted on 10/22/2012 7:36:53 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MrB
Not only does the EC recognize state sovereignty, it protects against voter fraud.

No matter how much fraud is perpetrated in the high population cities, they can only affect the number of EVs that their state has, not the entire country.


With regards to the 'popular vote' movement, others could push for a 'counties' movement. The candidate winning the most counties gets the EVs. In most recent elections, the GOP candidates have won more counties, thus more geographical area, nationwide, than the Dems, who tend to win the bigger cities.


20 posted on 10/22/2012 7:38:27 AM PDT by TomGuy (Dukakis is to tank as Obama is to binder & Big Bird)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: The Great RJ; anoldafvet

It doesn’t have to be tied. If no candidate gets 270 electoral votes, the election goes to the House.


21 posted on 10/22/2012 7:41:11 AM PDT by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; All

In the event of a tie..the next Congress decides...president is chosen by the House, by state delegations..so the GOP has that locked up..Mitt wins.. but the VP is chosen by the Senate..so if the Dems hold the Senate, then Biden is the VP..lord help us to keep Mitt safe...


22 posted on 10/22/2012 7:42:33 AM PDT by ken5050 (Another reason to vote for Mitt: The Mormon Tabernacle Choir will perform at the WH Christmas party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Why is this a nightmare? In case of a tie, Romney wins. Assuming that Kevin Cramer wins his Congressional race in North Dakota, the new Republican House member will cancel out the entire California Congressional delegation. Alaska’s Don Young will cancel out the entire New York Congressional delegation. The Illinois Congressional delegation will be voting for Mitt Romney.


23 posted on 10/22/2012 7:43:07 AM PDT by Hoodat ("As for God, His way is perfect" - Psalm 18:30)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
I've found the simplest way to explain the electoral college to a libtard is the deep and wide test. National popular vote is the deep test. The electoral college is the wide test. In case of a tie (nearly equal popular vote as in 2000), the winner is the candidate who wins the wide test.

Some of them actually accept this. If they still can't, then explain that we need to be more like Europe or Canada where the majority party in the legislature selects the head of state. That really makes their head explode.

Then explain that Maine and Nebraska have a modified system-- one electoral vote awarded for the winner of each congressional district, two awarded for each statewide winner.

24 posted on 10/22/2012 7:43:28 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy

You’re close to the idea that I had.

Instead of by county, though, I’d suggest by congressional district, since that’s how 435 of the EVs are apportioned anyway.


25 posted on 10/22/2012 7:45:16 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The odds aren’t that low.


Bull.

Assuming that the election really is close (and Romney doesn’t have the apparent swing state edge), we have, say, 10 states that could swing either way. If anyone one of them swings differently, the tie scenario fails to happen.

10 coin tosses is 1 in 1024 odds.

Even 5 swing states, and all the rest solidly locked to the tie scenario (which is an absurd assumption) is 1 in 32 odds.

This is interesting, but not news.


26 posted on 10/22/2012 7:47:06 AM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Hold My Beer and Watch This!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

We liked it the last time this happened...


27 posted on 10/22/2012 7:58:53 AM PDT by stuartcr ("When silence speaks, it speaks only to those that have already decided what they want to hear.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

If the Electoral College ties then the House gets to decide, and Romney will be the winner. Case closed. 100% Constitutional.

The Left will cry and whine and scream and burn things, but it won’t change anything.


28 posted on 10/22/2012 8:02:19 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This artilce/map has a forgotten that Romney will get ONE electoral vote from MAINE. That breaks the tie.

Therefore: Romney , WINNER, WINNER, CHICKEN DINNER !


29 posted on 10/22/2012 8:09:25 AM PDT by woodbutcher1963
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

“The chances of Obama winning the popular vote are slim and none.”

Right, so the whole premise of this article is stupid. It is more likely that Romney would be in the Al Gore position than Obama would be.

You know, I know Gore is a jerk and I was glad Bush prevailed (I even sent money to him for that recount effort - or whatever you want to call it), but I still feel bad for Gore about it. It must have been really maddening.


30 posted on 10/22/2012 8:13:56 AM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This scenario is, as many have said, unlikely.

First, Virginia is pretty much a gimme for Romney at this point. Also, as one poster mentioned, it is highly unlikely that Romney would win Ohio AND lose VA. Of course, Romney might lose Oiho, not knowing where that state is located, and not having campaigned there. :>)

Colorado is also looking like a Romney winner - Drudge has him up by 4 there, and undecideds usually vote for the challenger.

Quite unsaid here is that Maine is almost certain to give Romney 1 EV. If the EV vote is as tight as mentioned in the map provided, that 1 vote will make the difference.

I also share the view that Obama won’t win the popular vote. He is down by 22% in the South, a Romney lead that is hard to overcome (especially with the Mountain West probably being just as lopsided in his favor).

However, the only real “nightmare scenario” is one in which Obama takes the oath of office on 1/20/2013. All others we can deal with, including nationwide rioting. Regarding the credibility of Congress, it is so low now that it really can’t go any lower, so who cares?


31 posted on 10/22/2012 8:17:30 AM PDT by Ancesthntr (Why do blacks think that a half-white multi-millionairre really cares about them?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Except Obama is going to lose Colorado. And Ohio.

These panic mongers are the ones who, just a month ago, were assuring us Obama was going to win.

Obama’s unpopularity is VASTLY underreported. The media RARELY mentions how underwater he is with nearly EVERY demographic.


32 posted on 10/22/2012 8:18:50 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ancesthntr

In order to mitigate the “riot factor”, Mitt needs to win decisively, and not surprisingly, either.

The 0zombas must go into election day with the clear understanding that their guy is not likely to win.


33 posted on 10/22/2012 8:19:20 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

David Frum is a weasel.


34 posted on 10/22/2012 8:19:35 AM PDT by wolf24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

Oh yeah, and Obama is going to lose Virginia too.


35 posted on 10/22/2012 8:20:57 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jocon307
Gore wouldn't have been close enough to demand a recount in Florida if the media had not falsely claimed he had won Florida while polls were still open in the Panhandle (Central time zone) which is estimated to have cost Bush 10,000 votes. Gore did not get a majority of the popular vote, just a plurality. Bush could have lost the election in 2004 if there had been enough voter fraud in Ohio for Kerry to take that state, even though Bush had an actual majority of the popular vote.

I think if there is a tie the Obama people will bribe or blackmail one Romney elector into voting for Obama. The traitor would be richly rewarded but might have to go to Venezuela to live.

36 posted on 10/22/2012 8:24:51 AM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: anoldafvet

538 votes...the idiots in DC get three. I think those ought to be taken away and the DC voters put in either Maryland or Virginia precincts. The founders never meant for DC to become a permanent residence for the citizenry, otherwise they would have allocated electoral votes for it from the beginning.

There would be worse things than repealing the 23rd amendment.


37 posted on 10/22/2012 8:29:48 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Excellent point. I never thought of that.


38 posted on 10/22/2012 8:44:57 AM PDT by edwinland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul , Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning the 2008 Presidential election:

Number of States won by: Democrats: 19 Republicans: 29
Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million Republicans: 143 million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2 Republicans: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: “In aggregate, the map of the territory Republicans won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare...”

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the “complacency and apathy” phase of Professor Tyler’s definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation’s population already having reached the “governmental dependency” phase.


39 posted on 10/22/2012 8:54:28 AM PDT by Just another Joe (Warning: FReeping can be addictive and helpful to your mental health)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

What if Obama wins the popular vote and the electoral college is tied?

Assuming not all the compact states go blue, does anybody think they will try the compact ?
Compact States ...

1 Maryland 10 April 10, 2007
2 New Jersey 14 January 13, 2008
3 Illinois 20 April 7, 2008
4 Hawaii 4 May 1, 2008
5 Washington 12 April 28, 2009
6 Massachusetts 11 August 4, 2010
7 District of Columbia 3 December 7, 2010
8 Vermont 3 April 22, 2011
9 California 55 August 8, 2011
Total 132 (48.9% of the 270 EV need


40 posted on 10/22/2012 9:01:48 AM PDT by stylin19a (Obama ->The Jayson Blair administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

“I think if there is a tie the Obama people will bribe or blackmail one Romney elector into voting for Obama.”

Obama and co. are dirty enough to try this, I’m sure, which Gore and co. would not have done. They really are no better than a bunch of crooks this bunch.

The truly frightening part of your scenario, as with everything about this man, is that the media would never even question it. Rather they’d heap praises on the head of the faithless elector.

However, should the above come to pass (God forbid!) it would not end well as faith in our government and media would be completely destroyed for better than 1/2 the populace. I say better than half because there appears to be no doubt Romney will win Independents commandingly.


41 posted on 10/23/2012 9:08:42 AM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
This moves us beyond Bush v. Gore territory into someplace even more contested and more frightening

This is just pathetic.

First of all, the situation in 2000 was not a crisis and was not frightening. The creators of the system anticipated non-decisive Presidential elections (they thought it would be common) and designed a mechanism to deal with that. If the Supreme Court had stayed out of it in 2000, Bush would have been elected President in any legal and constitutional scenario (there were several).

As far as 2012 resulting in a no candidate majority situation: BFD. Again, the Constitutional mechanism for designating a President is more than adequate to deal with it.

42 posted on 10/23/2012 9:14:50 AM PDT by Jim Noble (Diseases desperate grown are by desperate appliance relieved or not at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jocon307

The Gore people had a lot of dirtry tricks in 2000, including making a specail effort to disallow votes from soldiers stationed overseas—particularly in Florida where it could help them overcome Bush’s lead in the popular vote. There was talk of trying to flip some of the Bush electors because the plurality in the electoral college was so small, but it may have been from people not officially connected to the Gore campaign.


43 posted on 10/23/2012 10:55:48 AM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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