Inspired by the recent Trump news, 43 states allow write-in candidates on ballots. However, of those states, 35 require some sort of filing, petition, or other declaration by the potential candidate in order for the write-in votes to count.
Mike Pence is a candidate for vice-president, but in general, would a write-in for Pence as President be considered a valid vote? I would imagine there may be up to 35 different answers, depending on the state election laws.
In general, no. I believe all the registration deadlines have passed. Pence has not registered as a write-in candidate for President in any state. Therefore a vote for him for President in those states would not be valid. His appearance on the ballot as a Vice-Presidential candidate would not give him status to automatically be considered as a Presidential candidate. In fact, the reverse might be true.
At this point, the only plausible way for Pence to become President would be if a majority of Republican electors are elected in the General Election and they switch their votes from Trump to Pence during the electoral balloting. But even that would be fraught with legal obstacles.
The following scenario can apply: Clinton does not receive a majority of electoral votes. Some Republican electors vote for Pence for President. (Most can do this legally. And we don’t need any. Perhaps one will do.)
The House then has to vote for President among the 3 top candidates. Assuming Pence was the only other to get a vote or he got more votes than the any other of the also-rans.
With a GOP controlled House, Pence would win. They could justify their vote by claiming the vote for POTUS electors were for Pence, not Trump due to various kerfuffles. It would help politically if they actually announced before the election that this was being considered. The more electors voted for Pence, the better.
True, but that still involves electors pledged to Trump changing their votes. In most states, there is no way to vote for Pence as President in his own right.
The faithless elector laws have never been tested. But it would take only one vote for Pence to get him to the house. The house has no obligation to vote for Trump and any 26 states could elect Pence.
These states generally provide for some type of punishment for those who cast votes for other than the candidate to whom they were pledged. It seems only two states make any kind of attempt to invalidate votes that were cast.
It seems entirely possible in the vast majority of states to cast faithless votes for, say, Pence, and then (1) have the votes counted fully and (2) dare the states to prosecute and see how the courts deal with it long after the election would be decided.
Oops I posted " And we don’t need any." That should be “And we don’t need many.”
True. But …
Assuming a House where the Rs hold 26+ states, the strategists have two choices:
Try to have Pence win in the EC by having most/all of Trump’s electors go faithless then hope enough of the legal challenges go their way.
Using just a few faithless electors from states where that’s 100% legal, push the election to the House. Where Pence winning is not legally controversial and (given 26+ R states in on the deal) guaranteed.
Either choice would be politically controversial. As would be electing Trump. Political controversy is all but guaranteed. So choosing the legally safest approach is probably the best option they have. Probably.