# Another Election Thread - Worst Case Scenario? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 9, 2000, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524 "2000-11-09T20:05:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2000, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/1 "2000-11-09T20:05:51Z")
What happens if Gore and the Democrat’s decide to dig in and fight it out? They seem to be heading in this direction already. With an army of lawyers, enormous stakes, plus some racial rabble rousers thrown into the mix, I can see another OJ trial/impeachment/Elian Gonzalez all in one. There is probably no end of “voting irregularities” that you can come up with in a state the size of Florida (or any state, I’ll bet). And difering legal opinions are already being bandied about that would justify this or that remedy. And as time goes by, it’s conceivable that partisans from each side will get more and more heated. What’s the ultimate outcome? ---
**Author:** ![lee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lee/32/7455_2.png) [@lee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lee)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2000, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/2 "2000-11-09T20:13:49Z")
Worst case? This drags on and in our confusion Canada invades. ---
**Author:** ![KSO](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f07891/32.png) [@KSO](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KSO)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2000, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/3 "2000-11-09T20:18:03Z")
Well, the electors don’t meet until December 18 (I think), so there’s plenty of time for hearings, rulings, and appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court before the electors have to vote. The problem is figuring out a remedy–you can’t let people vote again because they couldn’t figure out the ballot and are now upset that their guy lost. CNN reported today that 15,000 ballots were disqualified in a previous election for being double-punched. I would guess that tens of thousands of other ballots throughout Florida were disqualified because the voter failed to properly complete them. So do you let Florida vote again altogether? Well, that’s bull for those of us in the rest of the country. I think “worst case scenario” will be for either candidate to prolong matters beyond the recount. The better course will be for the loser to graciously concede and conclude with “I’ll see you in four years.” I’m not sure, but I doubt that a judge could bar the electors from voting on Dec. 18 nor could Congress be barred from opening the ballots on Jan. 3, so it really could end up in Congress, since, without Florida, neither guy has enough votes. Or the Florida Secretary of State could refuse to certify the outcome based on ALL of the apparent “irregularities” down there… ---
**Author:** ![BobT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e8cbc/32.png) [@BobT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobT)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2000, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/4 "2000-11-09T20:21:18Z")
The Constitution has provisions for deciding who will be president if no one has qualified for the job by January 20. If there is no qualified candidate for president, by that time, the vice president takes over the job. However, in the scenario described there wouldn’t be anybody qualified for that job. So, we turn to the next one in line, the Speaker of the House. Dennis Hastert would act as president until somebody was declared qualified to be president. This presumes that Hastert will be elected Speaker when the new Congress convenes on Jan. 3 The dates for the electoral college vote (Dec. 18) and the counting (Jan. 6) are set by statute, so Congress can change those if it sees fit. ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/5 "2000-11-10T13:28:10Z")
The NY Times has an article stating that most Constitutional experts believe that if the Florida experts are barred from voting, the election will go to the majority of the rest. So all Gore must do is tie up the issue with legal and recount challenges until December 18 and he’s in. Unless the Repubs do the same in other states. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/6 "2000-11-10T13:53:33Z")
OK, here’s another wild scenario:[list] [li]Bush wins the final count by a[/li]paper-thin margin. [li]Gore files a court challenge, based on the ballot problems in Palm Beach.[/li][li]The judge, after examining the evidence, finds that the ballots were not proper, and throws out the Palm Beach County results.[/li][li]The judge orders a special election which will decide which candidate’s electors get to go to the electoral college.[/li][li]Bush files an appeal.[/li][li]The appeal goes to the Florida Supreme Court. The loser of that appeal takes the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.[/li][li]Even assuming the appeals are handled expeditiously, there is no way to complete the appeals and schedule a special election prior to the date the Electoral College votes.[/li][li]The court issues an injunction to prohibit the Electoral College from voting until the results in Florida are final.[/li][li]Bush’s electors across the nation (including his Florida electors) defy the injunction and vote, giving Bush more than the required 270 electoral votes.[/li][li]OR, in the absence of an injunction no electors from Florida cast votes, and a vote is taken without them. Gore wins a majority of the non-Florida electoral vote, but then a debate ensues over whether he may claim the Presidency based on a majority of votes from electors actually voting. Another court battle ensues.[/li][li]Inauguration day comes, and the issue is still unsettled.[/li][li]Dennis Hastert, as Speaker of the House, is sworn in as interim President.[/li][li] **OR** (and this is **really** the worst case scenario: Hastert declines to serve because he does not want to give up his position as Speaker of the House for a brief gig as President, and the job falls to… **Strom Thurmond !!!** [/li] [The strains of “Hail to the Chief” echo down Pennsylvania Avenue as 98-year-old Strom Thurmond hobbles to the podium to take the oath…] ``` Does Hastert then get sworn in as interim President? ``` ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/7 "2000-11-10T13:56:00Z")
Oops. That last sentence was left in in error. ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/8 "2000-11-10T14:00:14Z")
I doubt if a court could issue an injunction stopping all the electors from voting. What I wonder about is the possibility that, if the issue remains unresolved (suppose both sets of electors vote), that there will be large groups of people each believing pasionately that their man is actually the president. Furthemore, different branches of government may also act in accordance with these views. IIRC, in the late 1860s, a constitutional crises erupted over a (Republican passed) law passed that barred the President (Andrew Johnson) from firing a cabinet minister without consent of congress. He promptly did so, and there were two ministers claiming to be the legitimate one. One (the incumbent) barricaded himself in his office, in an effort to maintain his position. ---
**Author:** ![David\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/51bf81/32.png) [@David\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_B)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/9 "2000-11-10T14:02:05Z")
Izzy said: > [@](#): > > The NY Times has an article stating that most Constitutional experts believe that if the Florida experts are barred from voting, the election will go to the majority of the rest. I don’t see how. You can’t just toss Florida out of the union. And without that state, neither candidate has enough votes. > [@](#): > > So all Gore must do is tie up the issue with legal and recount challenges until December 18 and he’s in. Unless the Repubs do the same in other states. I just cannot see this happening. Like I said, the Supreme Court will almost certainly make sure things are resolved. They’re not going to let a bunch of little lawsuits continue for months or years on end. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/10 "2000-11-10T14:12:55Z")
**IzzyR** wrote: > [@](#): > > I doubt if a court could issue an injunction stopping all the electors from voting. Of course a court could issue such an injunction. Now, the Electors might ignore it (at their own risk) or challenge it in a higher court, but there is no way to stop a court from issuing the injunction in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/11 "2000-11-10T14:13:19Z")
David, Here’s the [article](http://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/10/politics/10DATE.html) > [@](#): > > Dec. 18, the day that presidential electors are to meet in 50 state capitals and the District of Columbia, may produce a political crisis if Florida’s 25 votes are still in dispute. But the crisis will not be constitutional, scholars say, for the Constitution enables a president to be chosen even if a big state like Florida does not vote. > > Some commentators have suggested that the election would be thrown to the Republican-controlled House of Representatives if neither Vice President Al Gore nor Gov. George W. Bush of Texas gets a majority of the 538 electors for whom Americans voted on Tuesday. > > But the Constitution requires only that a winning candidate have the votes of “a majority of the whole number of electors appointed.” If Florida’s votes are not resolved by then, or if a legal restraining order bars Gov. Jeb Bush from filing a certificate listing Florida’s electors, then Mr. Gore has enough votes from other states, if current vote totals stand and if his electors keep their pledges, to reach a majority of the 513 electors actually appointed. ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/12 "2000-11-10T14:14:29Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by spoke- \* > \*\ ***IzzyR** wrote: > > > [@](#): > > > > I doubt if a court could issue an injunction stopping all the electors from voting. > > Of course a court could issue such an injunction. Now, the Electors might ignore it (at their own risk) or challenge it in a higher court, but there is no way to stop a court from issuing the injunction in the first place. \*\* Can a court issue an injunction to stop something that is specificly required by the Constitution? What gives them this power? ---
**Author:** ![David\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/51bf81/32.png) [@David\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_B)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/13 "2000-11-10T14:18:22Z")
Yup, you’re right. If the electors from Florida never get appointed, they don’t count. I hadn’t noticed that. Interesting. Man, what a fight _that_ would turn into… ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/14 "2000-11-10T14:22:57Z")
Here is the relevant language from [the Constitution](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/article02/). It looks like the President is determined by the majority of electoral votes received by the Senate. If Florida doesn’t vote, Florida doesn’t count. **IzzyR** , first of all, the Constitution requires an electoral vote, but doesn’t set the time of the vote, so a court could enjoin the vote until such time as the identity of Florida’s electors is determined. Secondly, even if the injunction is ultimately ruled unconstitutional on appeal, that doesn’t prevent the court from issuing it in the first place; it only means the injunction gets invalidated after the fact. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/15 "2000-11-10T14:35:06Z")
All of this may explain Bush’s actions in threatening to demand recounts in Iowa and Wisconsin. Bush may hope to tie up enough electors in those states to keep them from sending their votes to the Senate. That would give the electoral advantage back to Bush. ---
**Author:** ![SterlingNorth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8dc957/32.png) [@SterlingNorth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SterlingNorth)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/16 "2000-11-10T14:37:47Z")
I generally believe Joseph Farah to be a nut. But he has a good grasp of history, and Constitution Law. Take the following quote with a grain of salt and all language is his and not mine. > [@](#): > > _Originally written by Joseph Farah – [WorldNetDaily](http://www.wnd.com/bluesky_btl/20001110_xcbtl_al_gore_an.shtml)_ > But, more recently, another thought has occurred to me – a darker, more sinister thought. I hope I am wrong. I pray that, this time, I am overestimating the deviousness of Al Gore. But that, of course, is always a difficult task. > > Think, for a moment, why Al Gore would suddenly be reading and citing the Constitution. > > The answer is that, in this instance, it gives him all the power. What do I mean? > > Who is it, under the Constitution, that is specifically charged with certifying the Electoral College votes of each state? You guessed it. The president of the U.S. Senate, which also happens to be the vice president of the United States. That’s right. The day those Electoral College votes go to the Senate to be counted and certified to choose the next president of these United States, Al Gore will be holding all the cards. If the Senate doesn’t accept the certification, this could be interesting indeed. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/17 "2000-11-10T14:41:48Z")
It’s a good thing Gore presides over the Senate. Otherwise, the Florida Bush electors could unilaterally claim victory, send in their votes, and have them certified by the Republican Senate. ---
**Author:** ![Freedom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Freedom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedom)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/18 "2000-11-10T14:53:56Z")
Or… You could have two Electoral colleges meet, both claiming to be the “legitimate” college. One would have all the Electors Gore won straight up, plus the Gore Electors from Florida, and the other would have all the ones Bush won straight up plus the Bush Electors form College. They would both vote. Anyone know who has to certify the results? (The VP:)) ---
**Author:** ![KSO](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f07891/32.png) [@KSO](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KSO)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2000, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/19 "2000-11-10T18:31:06Z")
Leaving aside the question of whether a judge could order electors NOT to carry out their constitutional duties, no single judge can issue an injunction barring the electors from voting–injunctions will have to be obtained in all 50 states plus D.C. plus Puerto Rico. Given that little word “appointed” in the 12th amendment (which I believe would be interpreted to mean “elected”), it might actually be in GWB’s interest to get the injunction train rolling across the U.S. I’m confident that this mess will be sorted out by Dec. 18. As an aside, either guy is screwed for the next 4 years and will be branded by the 49,000,000 citizens who DIDN’T support him as a thief and usurper, if not worse… ---
**Author:** ![rocking\_chair](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rocking_chair/32/2918_2.png) [@rocking\_chair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rocking_chair)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2000, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524/20 "2000-11-11T02:08:06Z")
lee, your comment regarding canada has kept me laughing for hour. then i told a canadian coworker that we had tumbled onto their plot. my mind reels with the thought of french canadians and louisiana cajuns could do once reunited. i’m sure that a thurmond presidency would be the signal to launch the attack. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-election-thread-worst-case-scenario/40524.md?page=2)