# Democratic VP Hypothetical **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [April 10, 2012, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-vp-hypothetical/618403 "2012-04-10T20:00:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2012, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-vp-hypothetical/618403/41 "2012-04-12T16:09:23Z")
> [@bienville](#): > > But using 2000 as an example, taking Texas’s electors from Cheney would have made Lieberman the Vice-Presidential winner of the Electoral College no matter who Texas’ electors voted for, isn’t that correct? No, Lieberman would have had a plurality but not the majority he would have need to be elected. The results would have been something like this: Lieberman: 266 Cheney: 239 Colin Powell: 32 (or whoever the Texas Republican Electors decided to cast their votes for) So nobody would have the 270 votes needed to have a majority. These men, as the top three Electoral College vote getters, would be the slate the House of Representatives would have to select a Vice President from. And once the 107th Congress was sworn in, there would have been twenty-eight states with a Republican majority in the House (they vote by state blocs for Presidents and Vice Presidents) so Cheney would have been elected. (Ironically Texas, with a Democratic majority in its Congressional delegation (17-13) probably would have voted for Lieberman.) ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2012, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-vp-hypothetical/618403/43 "2012-04-12T18:20:51Z")
I’m sure it would never happen in a million years, but what do people think about the possibility of maximizing his moderate credentials by choosing Olympia Snow. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2012, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-vp-hypothetical/618403/44 "2012-04-12T18:28:04Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > I’m sure it would never happen in a million years, but what do people think about the possibility of maximizing his moderate credentials by choosing Olympia Snow. I’d love to listen in on that phone call. “Thanks for voting against my health care bill! How would you like to be vice president?” ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2012, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-vp-hypothetical/618403/45 "2012-04-12T18:38:48Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > So nobody would have the 270 votes needed to have a majority. These men, as the top three Electoral College vote getters, would be the slate the House of Representatives would have to select a Vice President from. And once the 107th Congress was sworn in, there would have been twenty-eight states with a Republican majority in the House (they vote by state blocs for Presidents and Vice Presidents) so Cheney would have been elected. (Ironically Texas, with a Democratic majority in its Congressional delegation (17-13) probably would have voted for Lieberman.) Not quite. The House votes for President if the electors fail to reach a majority. The Senate votes for Vice President if the electors for VP fail to have a majority. From the 12 Amendment: > [@](#): > > The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. ---
**Author:** ![bienville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@bienville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bienville)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2012, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-vp-hypothetical/618403/46 "2012-04-12T23:54:02Z")
So, even in a very close election like 2000, the elected President would still get his chosen VP even with that VP losing the electors from _one of the largest States_. Add to this very slim likelihood that it would make any difference, the rule is trivially easy to circumvent by simply having the VP declare residency in another State. I am no longer surprised I had never heard of this before. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2012, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-vp-hypothetical/618403/47 "2012-04-13T00:17:25Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Not quite. The House votes for President if the electors fail to reach a majority. The Senate votes for Vice President if the electors for VP fail to have a majority. You’re right. I missed that. > [@bienville](#): > > Add to this very slim likelihood that it would make any difference, the rule is trivially easy to circumvent by simply having the VP declare residency in another State. That is, in fact, what happened in 2000. Cheney lived in Texas and had been a legal resident of that state. Right before he was nominated, he moved his legal residence back to Wyoming. (At the time, he owned a home in both states as well as a third in Virginia.) There was a legal challenge. Wyoming law at the time said that if you had been a legal resident of another state, you had to wait a year in order to declare you were a legal resident of Wyoming. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Cheney was a legal Wyoming resident and the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal. ---
**Author:** ![bienville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@bienville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bienville)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2012, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-vp-hypothetical/618403/48 "2012-04-13T01:12:55Z")
Rereading my last post, I just want to make known my appreciation for each of you who has taken the time to explain the nuances of Article II, Section 1 to me. In expressing how unimpressed I am at the sheer pointlessness of the rule, I hope it didn’t sound like I was disrespecting the efforts that have been made to educate me on the matter. To recap: You guys = awesome Article II, Section 1 = stupid ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2012, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-vp-hypothetical/618403/49 "2012-04-13T01:48:29Z")
Bear in mind, Article II, Section 1 was enacted at a time when it was not trivially easy to circumvent - few if any of the drafters would have had residences in two states. Also, it was enacted when then inhabitants of the 13 states were still a bit suspicious of each other, so the idea that someone would move across a state line to run for President was a non-starter - such a person would not likely get many votes. The rule was designed to prevent one of the big states (like Virginia) from holding both executive offices at once. ---
**Author:** ![Trepa\_Mayfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@Trepa\_Mayfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trepa_Mayfield)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2012, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-vp-hypothetical/618403/50 "2012-04-13T02:37:26Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Bear in mind, Article II, Section 1 was enacted at a time when it was not trivially easy to circumvent - few if any of the drafters would have had residences in two states. Also, it was enacted when then inhabitants of the 13 states were still a bit suspicious of each other, so the idea that someone would move across a state line to run for President was a non-starter - such a person would not likely get many votes. The rule was designed to prevent one of the big states (like Virginia) from holding both executive offices at once. Also, at the time, the VP was just expected to be the runner-up in the presidential election, which meant the votes for VP were actually relevant. Also (also), sometimes they hated each other, and the VP would work to undermine the president, much like Congress has been since 2006. Imagine, for a second, a Bush/Gore presidency. Wouldn’t that be crazy? ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2012, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-vp-hypothetical/618403/51 "2012-04-18T13:02:41Z")
> [@BigAppleBucky](#): > > … > **O’Malley** - Some people think that he’s setting himself up for a run, including his switch on same-sex marriage. Maryland wouldn’t give him a good base to run in 2016, so a four year stint at VEEP would be valuable to him. But he’s little known at this point and wouldn’t help the ticket much in 2012… I saw a video of O’Malley bitch-slapping Governor McDonnell and the Virginia Republicans, and this guy has real talent. I think he would be a big plus to the campaign. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2012, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-vp-hypothetical/618403/52 "2012-04-18T22:03:06Z")
> [@Trepa\_Mayfield](#): > > Also, at the time, the VP was just expected to be the runner-up in the presidential election, which meant the votes for VP were actually relevant. Yeah, but apparently it was still considered a good idea when the 12th Amendment was passed, which did away with the runner-up idea.. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-vp-hypothetical/618403/53 "2012-04-19T00:25:17Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > The results would have been something like this: > > Lieberman: 266 > Cheney: 239 > Colin Powell: 32 (or whoever the Texas Republican Electors decided to cast their votes for) > > So nobody would have the 270 votes needed to have a majority. These men, as the top three Electoral College vote getters, would be the slate the House of Representatives would have to select a Vice President from. And once the 107th Congress was sworn in, there would have been twenty-eight states with a Republican majority in the House (they vote by state blocs for Presidents and Vice Presidents) so Cheney would have been elected. (Ironically Texas, with a Democratic majority in its Congressional delegation (17-13) probably would have voted for Lieberman.) It actually would have been quite more interesting than that, seeing as the Senate appoints the VP in that case, and seeing as the new Senate was tied 50-50, with the outgoing VP, Al Gore, casting the deciding vote. Meaning that in such a scenario, Lieberman probably could have been VP depending on how charitable Gore was feeling to his former running mate. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-vp-hypothetical/618403/54 "2012-04-19T00:34:30Z")
Interesting. From all I’ve read, Gore and Lieberman ended the 2000 campaign with a mutual respect for one another, so Gore might very well have cast the vote that would make his running mate George W. Bush’s VP. And then Vice President Lieberman would almost surely have used his tie-breaking vote in the Senate to help his party. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democratic-vp-hypothetical/618403.md?page=2)