Could Trump run without a VP nominee?

[Dr_Paprika]

They need a name, not a corpus. Lara Kane for VP!

[Czarcasm]

1. Not white enough
2. Too female
3. Too sane

[Smapti]

@zimaane

I suspect that some states have a rule that a Presidential candidate must be paired with a VP candidate on the voting ballots. No so VP candidate = not being on the ballot.

The red states would bend over backwards to make an exception for Trump, and the blue states will meekly ignore their own law because they don’t want to “breach norms”.

[Chronos]

I mean, given how idiotically bad an idea this would be for Trump, the blue states should make an exception to allow it, if they possibly can. Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.

That said (and this is a statement that one very rarely has the opportunity to make), I don’t think that even Trump and the current batch of Republicans are that idiotic, so it won’t happen. Long before it got to that point, they’d name Ivanka or Don Jr. or someone VP.

[Dr_Paprika]

If only there was some easy way to change these things…

No need to have the same features for different audiences. And make the accent local! “Grits! I love grits!”.

Not sure Aishi Tyler’s character qualifies for your first and third objections.

[Hari_Seldon]

@Chronos

If Trump wins but there is no VP candidate with a majority of votes, then you pick the top 3 VP vote-getters, one of whom would almost certainly be Harris, due to the Republicans splitting up their votes

No, it is only the top 2 VP candidates. And I think the new senate is seated on Jan. 6 and is very likely to be Republican so they will choose a Republican.

[Exapno_Mapcase]

@Chronos

and then Harris herself would have the tiebreaking vote.

My understanding is that Congress alone has to determine election results, meaning that the VP would not get to vote on such a matter. Pence’s determination that he could play no role in deciding blocks of eligible electors back in 2021 is an example. No ties needed breaking in the single 19th century case, so there is be no precedent to guide the VP’s role.

[Kent_Clark]

@Stranger_On_A_Train

As President of the Senate, they cast tie-breaking votes, and in theory could engage in a lot of fuckery to interfere with normal functioning of that legislative body but their presiding role is governed by procedural rules created by the Senate itself, so presumably a majority of senators could just vote to shut down the Vice President.

Lyndon Johnson, who had been Majority Leader of the Senate, had something like that in mind when he became Vice President. He very quickly learned that the same Democratic Senators who feared him as Majority Leader had no intention of giving up any of their power to him as President of the Senate.

[Velocity]

Well, the question is suddenly a lot more relevant this evening than it was this morning.

[Chronos]

How so? I don’t see how the assassination attempt would make Trump any more likely to run without a VP.

[flurb]

@Hari_Seldon

No, it is only the top 2 VP candidates.

Correct – under the 12th Amendment, a contingent election for President chooses among the top 3 candidates, but a contingent election for VP chooses from the top 2.

@Exapno_Mapcase

My understanding is that Congress alone has to determine election results, meaning that the VP would not get to vote on such a matter.

Also correct – the 12th Amendment requires a majority of the whole number of Senators to elect a VP (i.e. 51 Senators)

[OldGuy]

@Chronos

hen you pick the top 3 VP vote-getters, one of whom would almost certainly be Harris, due to the Republicans splitting up their votes. Those three then go to the Senate, who pick one. Even if, at this point, the Republicans do all coalesce behind one candidate, this would be done by the old Senate, which has 50 Democrats, and all 50 Democrats would presumably vote for Harris, and then Harris herself would have the tiebreaking vote.

No and no.

The Senate picks from the two two candidates for VP (the House picks from the top 3 candidates is probably what confused you). And the Electoral College votes are not tabulated until after the new House and Senate are seated (on January 3), It is after that that the Senate would vote. However, you’re right that Harris would still be VP and preside over this.