What if the 2012 Presidential Election Ends in a Tie? [The joke could be on Obama!]

Hispanic Business ^ | October 25, 2012 | Thomas Fitzgerald

[Bender2]

What if the 2012 Presidential Election Ends in a Tie?
October 25, 2012
Thomas Fitzgerald

The final days of a close race for the White House, like the one now unfolding between President Obama and Mitt Romney, are always loud, tense, and messy, but most end with a clear result.

What if this year is different, and Nov. 6 is only the beginning of the chaos?

What if it ends in a tie?

An Electoral College tie -- with each man getting 269 votes instead of the 270 needed to win -- is possible, analysts say, a result that would unleash enough political and legal disorder to make people yearn for the tamer controversy over "hanging chads" in the 2000 Florida recount.

In a tie scenario, the Constitution says the House of Representatives would choose the next president, and the Senate would choose the vice president -- provided no members of the Electoral College desert their candidate. There's a term for this phenomenon: faithless electors.

[annieokie]

That is exactly what I think is going to happen.

Hope someone is around to get a picture of O and Mooche that night.

Priceless is that Tom Daschle loser picture.

[catfish1957]

Doesn’t Nebraska also have some kind of split EV system?

[Bender2]

This is what... I really expect:

[svcw]

obama is advertising in California, I do understand some of the ads are national, many are on local stations, news paper ad in last Sunday’s paper. Why?
Even Lois Capps (D) for congress is advertising on the local radio during Limbaugh, weird.
Romney’s train is roaring along.
It appears that Romney is picking up many states previously not in play.
Now that obama, I am raising your taxes and gutting the military info release, I wonder how he could win.
The states you mentioned, are a surprise.

[cripplecreek]

Michigan has been moving to the right for quite some time now despite the popular opinions of FR.

Back in 04 Kerry only won Michigan by 4 or 5 points. 06 was fairly quiet but my district did remove a moderate and place a conservative congressman in office. 08 was a fluke for obvious reasons but in 2010 the GOP ran the table on the democrats with the democrats picking up exactly zero seats above the county level. This year the democrats are struggling to hold the seats they have and aren't mounting any real challenges for new ones. I can't even tell you the name of the democrat challenger in my district. The democrats lose a seat to redistricting which has led to some infighting there. At the state level the GOP holds the whole deck of cards.

Its also important to note that there's a multi factional civil war brewing within the unions. Private sector Union conservatives are openly supporting Romney and calling for right to work laws while fighting the public sector unions on the ballot initiatives they have on the ballot. Meanwhile individual groups of SEIU employees are splitting off and forming their own unions and some are suing the SEIU.

This is the current congressional make up of Michigan. If it weren't for that stinkin 17th Amendment, Michigan would have 2 GOP senators in DC as well.

[svcw]

That is good news.
I have seen similar maps of California, and it is surprising how red it really is, contrary to popular opinion.
Unfortunately, liberals coven together in large groups which favors liberals.
(For some reason photobucket has changed their codes for posting, I can’t get the html ones to work, or they are not available, so can’t post the map)

[dglang]

Not to mention several states trying to give their electorial votes to the winner of the national popular vote.

I believe that some states have already changed their laws (all Dem states)to be effective for this election.

Wouldn’t it be great for the states that are always solid Dem to be forced by their own laws to give their electorial votes to Romney?