Even if it is all correct no reason why the states go to Trump.
If Biden pulls out the democrats wil either vote for him anyway or vote for a 3rd party candidate (say Kennedy). If they get the most votes the electoral college might not vote for the democrat but they will not vote for Trump.
It’s hard to imagine Biden getting 1.63 million write-in votes. That’s how many he got in 2020, and he’ll need every last one of them to take Wisconsin again.
The problem is if, say, Harris wins 269 electoral votes, Trump wins 255, and “Biden” wins NV and WI for the other 14. If the Biden electors aren’t allowed to switch to Harris, then there is no majority in the electoral college, and the election goes to the House, which will re-elect Trump despite the fact that the voters obviously preferred Democrats.
They should have imagined the possibility of a contested convention. This year is unusual in that both nominees were “known” very early in the process. That’s not always the case.
The factual claims in the Fox article are bullshit. There is no ballot.
From here (for Wisconsin): Ballot access requirements for presidential candidates in Wisconsin - Ballotpedia
Ballot-qualified political parties must certify the names of their presidential candidates with the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board by 5:00 p.m. on the first Tuesday in September in the year of the election. In addition, each candidate so nominated must file a declaration of candidacy by the same deadline.
There is no ballot right now, so there is no name to replace. There is plenty of time to change candidates, if that should occur.
This shouldn’t have passed the common sense test for anyone. What state would possibly finalize general election ballots prior to the party conventions (and thus prior to the official selection of candidates)?
Liberals now have a majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which would decide any questions regarding state law.
The Nevada Secretary of State – who certifies who may appear on the ballot – is a Democrat. The Nevada Supreme Court is elected through nonpartisan elections.
The Democratic National Convention will be held from August 19 to 22.
I am not from the US so I might have missed something.
I was assuming the house would vote along party lines is that correct? If so is it virtually certain the Republicans will win control the House I thought it was more open than that.
In a contingent election for President, the House votes among the three candidates who received the most electoral votes. However, the states vote as delegations – i.e. the Representatives for a state vote among themselves who they support, and whoever wins gets that state’s single vote for President.
This advantages Republicans because they are overrepresented in smaller states that will have the same voting power as large states. Due to this quirk, it’s possible that Democrats could win back the House and the House would still elect Trump in a contingent election.
It’s nice to know it’s bullshit, but it’s hardly unheard of for State legislatures to do things that don’t pass the common sense test, so I don’t blame people for being concerned.
Even still though, I think it was quite narrow. IIRC, in the 2020 election, it came out to just a 26-24 Republican advantage. I’m not sure what would happen if the House voted as a 25-25 tie.
No one is elected President and the Vice-President elect would assume the office.
The important thing to remember also is that it’s the incoming Congress. Since the new session begins a little more than two weeks before the inauguration.
It gets even weirder, though. Since the electoral college wouldn’t have been able to elect a VP, either, that decision goes to the Senate (voting in the ordinary way, one vote per Senator), and if the House doesn’t get its act together by Inauguration Day, the VP becomes Acting President (but still serves only until the House chooses a President, if they ever do). If the Senate can’t elect a VP, the Speaker of the House becomes Acting President. If, in the two weeks between the swearing in of the new Congress and Inauguration Day, the House hasn’t managed to elect a Speaker…I don’t know. Let’s hope we don’t go there.
I took some time to look into the Nevada one when this come up last week, and I came to the same conclusion as @iiandyiiii - these claims are bullshit.
The laws in question are for major-party candidates who are selected in state primary elections (things like Senate, AG, Governor, etc). They do not, and in fact can not, apply to Presidential candidates since the state-wide primary/caucus for President doesn’t select the Presidential candidate whose name would appear on the ballot.
Imagine a Democratic Presidential candidate didn’t even run in the Nevada primary (and thus did not file as a Presidential candidate in NV), but ran, and won, in every other state. Are you telling me that candidate could not appear on the NV Presidential ballot? Nonsense.
You can read the laws here, but the most important takeaway is that the people running the elections in NV and WI are Democrats (GA, not so much, but the “deadline” there is later). Folks can sue to try to get Harris (or whomever) thrown off the ballot, but it won’t happen before the ballots are printed and votes are cast.
And for the party that threw such a hissy-fit about Colorado trying to remove Trump from it’s ballot it would be pretty rich - although hyprocrisy has never been something the GOP has shied away from.
ETA: As to why folks would float these “stories”, I would hypothesize that (a) the Heritage Foundation doesn’t want Biden to be replaced and (b) planting seeds of “it was stolen, elections are fake” is party of the GOP brand at this point.
ETA2: The reason this is “bullshit” for NV is because a different section of law specifically for Presidential elections supercedes the one everybody has been citing - NRS: CHAPTER 298 - PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS AND ELECTIONS. It says the party decides who the candidate is.
I’d assume the President Pro Tem of the Senate, based on the line of succession. For better or worse, that is a position that is guaranteed to be filled by then.
Moderating: @Velocity
Please avoid bait and switch titles to OPs, especially political OPs. I prefixed the title following a helpful flag.
Thank you.
I would assume that, too. You’re saying it’s guaranteed, because in the event of a tie, the incumbent Vice President would still be in office and could break the tie? That makes sense.
nm, dumb post
The Constitution requires a majority of Senators (i.e. 51 Senators) to elect the VP in a contingent election – there is no tie breaker. A tie vote means no one is elected.
So then there’s no guarantee that they will be able to reach a majority, either (Probably not an issue in this election, but could be a real pickle in a three or four way race).