Morbid, I know, but the presumptive nominees are advanced in age during a global pandemic, so I feel it’s very relevant.
If Biden were to pass between nomination and election, would that drive away voters reluctant to vote for a woman who may or may not have executive experience? Or would she attract voters who wanted to elect the first female president in 2016, but was put off by Hillary Clinton’s baggage?
If Trump were to die between nomination and election, would that deflate the hardcore supporters who would view anyone else as milquetoast in comparison, especially Pence? Or would it energize Republicans who still believe in the party’s values but hated Trump?
Maybe all of it will happen at once, but what side would be heavier? Or would there be an effect I’m not thinking about right now?
You are making the assumption that the party’s VP candidate would automatically become the Presidential candidate. There are procedures in place for each party to replace a candidate if necessary. IIRC, the last time it was done was in 1972, when the Democrats replaced Thomas Eagleton with Sargent Shriver as George McGovern’s VP candidate.
And what about the possibility that either or both candidates (particularly the one who wins) die between Election Day and January 20. 2021? That would be 2 1/2 months, and given that by virtue of their age(s) they are unlikely to live for much longer than 10 years (120 months) that gives a hastily calculated chance of about 2.2% or higher of that happening. What then?
If it’s after December 14, it won’t matter. That’s when the Electors cast their votes. If they vote for Joe Biden as President and Unnamed Woman as Vice President and Biden dies before January 20, then Unnamed Woman, the Vice President Elect, becomes President on that date just like she would if Biden died in office.
If Biden died before December 14, there might be some push to have the Electors change their votes and cast the presidential votes directly for Unnamed Woman. The legality of that would be subject to fifty different sets on election laws. But it wouldn’t make any practical difference.
Nothing would happen if both candidates died. Cuz the election is just a dog and pony show to keep the masses distracted from trying to make any real change. Election = reality show, and regardless of who wins, the lower class still gets the shaft. But let’s face it, these people are rich AF… and powerful… The chances of them ever coming within 100 feet of a major pandemic are zero to none.
That was after the nomination, what about before nomination? Presumably it would be a similar situation as with the electoral college in the general election, the party convention would get to choose the candidate? What about if its Trump who gets a fatal case of the 'ronas? The presidency would automatically pass to Pence, would the GOP candidacy as well?
Also what if its closer to the election? The candidates names presumably are printed (or whatever the equivalent is nowadays) before the election by a bazillion different electoral bodies. They can’t change overnight I assume? Would those votes be valid if they aren’t changed in time?
Before the nomination, nobody has been nominated for President. Never mind how many delegates any candidate has received.
It may depend on the party. The only rule I can find in the Democratic Party Rules is, “All delegates to the National Convention pledged to a presidential candidate shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them.” I think the Republican rules are on a state-by-state basis; in California, for example, it’s not clear if delegates pledged to someone who has died still have to vote for that candidate or are free to vote for anyone. (Normally, in California, pledged candidates have to vote for that candidate until either the candidate withdraws, receives less than 10% of the vote on the first ballot, or after the second ballot.)
Remember, the people are voting for members of the Electoral College, and not for the candidates themselves. Presumably, each party will select electors for each state that will vote according to the wishes of the party. The Supreme Court just ruled that a state law may allow for an elector to be replaced if the elector does not vote for the “mandated” candidate.
If a dead candidate’s name appears on the ballot, then, almost certainly, that party will go to great pains to remind voters that voting for that candidate will count as voting for their replacement.
Cecil’s column is still pretty good, but there has been a major development since 1980 that could complicate things. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court ruled in Chiafalo v. Washington that states may enforce requirements on presidential electors that they vote for their state’s nominee (i.e. to prevent “faithless electors”). Would that mean that electors from states with such statutes would be required to vote for a dead man? If Trump were to have a narrow EC lead, and some of his electors voted for him but others (not bound by such statutes) voted for another Republican, then there would be no electoral college majority and the House would decide who would be the President.