Political: Could 2004 be worse than 2000 ?

[wvrevy]

There is a very interesting article in this morning's USA Today. In it, they talk about the possibility of an electoral tie in November's election. For this to happen, just two states - New Hampshire and West Virginia - would have to vote Democrat rather than as they voted last time. If just those two were to change, and every other state remain blue or red as they were in 2000, we would have a REAL mess on our hands, the likes of which this country has never seen.

Now, I don't know how likely this scenario really is, but with both of those states still running in near statistical dead heats, it ain't exactly hitting the electoral lotto.

Just something to think about

Here is the story: Election could produce nightmare scenarios

 

[shortbun]

eewwww!

 

[AirForceRocks]

The possibilities really are fascinating!

 

[Toby'sFriend]

oh I agree.

For those who haven't heard the story in an Electoral tie, the House of Representatives elects a President. The House would most likely be controlled by the Republicans and would elect George W. Bush.

However, the Senate then elects the Vice President -- and the Senate could conceivably be controlled by the Democrats given current election polling data. They could very well elect Edwards.

Next President/Vice President -- Bush/Edwards.

 

[Doug123]

Wouldn't the Senate elect Kerry as Vice President, under the above stated scenario?

 

[wvrevy]

Originally posted by Doug123
Wouldn't the Senate elect Kerry as Vice President, under the above stated scenario?

It's a possibility...'Course, I wouldn't be all that surprised if they put in Ted Kennedy at that point

This whole scenario would be an absolute disaster in my opinion. We need to just go to a true democratic election and get it over with.

 

[caitycaity]

while i agree the possibilities are fascinating, an electoral tie has happened before.

 

[wvrevy]

Originally posted by caitycaity
while i agree the possibilities are fascinating, an electoral tie has happened before.

Yes, but I don't think that what happened with Jefferson and Burr caused anywhere near the havoc that I think could occur should it happen in 2004.

 

[JoeThaNo1Stunna]

I wouldn't mind any of this happening, we have a good system and I see no need to change it because of a possible tie. It wouldn't make me mad if there were a tie an a Bush/Edwards presidency because those were the rules we agreed upon before we played the game.

What would make me mad is if we did recount after recount to eventually get a result someone liked. I don't believe there should be recounts at all, there is too much room for human interference.

 

[caitycaity]

well in 1824, the house decided the presidency and didn't give it to the guy who won the popular vote or the plurality of the electoral college.

it certainly will be an interesting election night, watching the returns.

 

[jrydberg]

Tim Russert would be working some serious overtime on that whiteboard of his.

 

[Bob Slydell]

Originally posted by jrydberg
Tim Russert would be working some serious overtime on that whiteboard of his.

Gotta love Tim and his whiteboard!!

Then again, I'm biased since we're alumni from the same college.

 

[UncleKyle]

Saw the article this morning (I'm a geek and get my USA Today delivered ) and it seems like it's a very likely scenario. I'm sure the networks will love it, some might even have a hand in it like last time.

Originally posted by wvrevy
This whole scenario would be an absolute disaster in my opinion. We need to just go to a true democratic election and get it over with.

A disaster I agree but not sure getting rid of the electoral college is a good idea either. If we went by popular vote, then we'd shut out the small states. Why would a candidate go to Montana, Wyoming, the dakotas, vermont, maine, Idaho, or New Mexico? Why not just focus on where everyone lives? The east coast, california, Michigan, Texas, and Florida? I doubt a candidate would even come to my home state. The electoral college isn't perfect system but it protects those who would never have a decision in an election.

 

[charlie,nj]

interesting piece..even though it is saying there is a 1.4 % change of it happening.



Even mathematicians are calculating the odds. At the request of Sracic, mathematics professor Nathan Ritchey set up a Microsoft Excel program to calculate the chances for an Electoral College tie, assuming 17 battleground states.

He made adjustments last week to take into account the possibility that Maine's electoral votes could be divided between the two candidates. Maine and Nebraska allocate some electoral votes by congressional district; the other 48 states are winner-take-all.

His conclusion: There is a 1.4% chance of a tie in the Electoral College. Which happens to be the same odds of the results that occurred in 2000.

Though both campaigns are bracing for that possibility, history suggests that their preparations may not turn out to be necessary. No presidential re-election contest in modern times has been narrowly won or lost.

Presidents Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton won re-election decisively; Jimmy Carter and the elder George Bush bombed. Polls showed some of those contests nearly even until the final weeks.

"Since these elections often turn out to be referenda on the incumbent president, undecided voters seem to make a collective decision in the final few days about whether the president deserves to be re-elected," says Stuart Rothenberg, editor of the non-partisan Rothenberg Political Report. "That can swing the results rather dramatically, providing either a decisive defeat or a clear victory."

 

[Elwood Blues]

If this does happen, I hope we don't hear a lot of crybabies and reports of "disenfranchised" voters.

Ugh!!

 

[AirForceRocks]

Originally posted by Elwood Blues
If this does happen, I hope we don't hear a lot of crybabies and reports of "disenfranchised" voters.

Ugh!!

No doubt!!

 

[caitycaity]

Originally posted by jrydberg
Tim Russert would be working some serious overtime on that whiteboard of his.

 

[AirForceRocks]

Am I imagining things, or did I hear that Tim's whiteboard from 2000 is now in the Smithsonian?

 

[Bob Slydell]

Originally posted by AirForceRocks
Am I imagining things, or did I hear that Tim's whiteboard from 2000 is now in the Smithsonian?

Seriously???

 

[AirForceRocks]

I thought I had heard or read that somewhere, but I could be mistaken.