Talk Elections

I know that this outcome is virtually impossible, because states move in waves. The precise state breakdown to give each candidate 269 is hard to imagine, due to the fact that states vote in waves. A candidate who wins a less Democratic leaning state is almost certain to win states that lean more in his favor. But let's discuss.

Give Obama NH, OH and WI. Give Romney FL, NC, VA, IA, NV and CO. 269-269 tie in electoral college. This throws the election into the new House of Representatives, where Republicans control the show and could have majorities in 26 states after the election. For purposes of this thread/poll, ignore the possibility that neither party has a majority of state delegations, because that gets too messy. Assume Republicans control at least 26, because otherwise the most likely outcome is a President Biden until a midterm election can be held. And don't tell me this wont happen. Assume it will be selecting between Romney and Obama and no compromise candidate emerges.

So we know that the House will select Romney if he wins the popular vote, which is only fair. In the case of an electoral college tie, the tie should go to the popular vote winner. Here's the money question: assume Obama wins the popular vote in a 269-269 tie. Would the Republicans put party above country and select Romney, knowing the unrest this would create? Should they?

You guys who believe that the House should not select Obama... have the guts to state your reasons publicly in this thread.

I suspect the white majority will find a way for the white candidate to win. 

The house will elect Romney.

Stop trolling. You're a Republican and a Romney supporter so the only reason you post this bilge is to paint a caricature of a black Democrat who sees racism behind everything. If the presidential candidates were Hillary and Cain, do you think the white majority in the Republican house would find a way for the white candidate to win?

Come off it, it's disgusting. Your posts joking about racism being behind potential decisions/outcomes we part of a long Republican trend. Limbaugh jokes in this way all the time, and the purpose of it is to desensitize Americans to real racism when and where it occurs. It's the boy crying wolf, except the wolf is jocularly calling it on himself.

It isn't funny. When Republicans wonder why they can't manage more than 11% of the black vote, posts like yours should be part of their introspective analysis.

There's no way the House will select Obama. Come on...

Of course the house will elect Romney. Apart from everything else, any Republican who dares to vote for Obama, will be an easy target for a primary challenger. The only possible exceptions are some Republicans voting for Obama because he won their districts but I doubt that even that would be widespread.

I don't really find any of your options that fit, so I didn't vote, but here's what I think should happen.  Each delegation gets one vote, and each delegation should vote for the candidate winning a plurality in their home state.  This should be the case regardless of whether the majority of the state delegation is Republican or Democrat.  If they do it this way, here's my prediction:

Obama 25
Romney 25

I'm basing this on the fact that in 25 states Romney is polling ahead, and in 25 states Obama is polling ahead.  Does DC's delegation get a vote?  If so, then Obama wins.  I don't think it does, though.

By the way, the actual Electors meet on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December (December 17, 2012) to cast their votes.  Only about half the states have laws requiring their Electors to vote for the popular vote winner, so just because the networks call it 269-269 on election night doesn't really mean that it will be a tie.  Lots of deals can be struck in the six weeks between popular election day and the day the Electors meet to choose a president.

Option 2.

Option 2 because while the House won't select him, it would be the democratically proper thing to do.

Most speculative pieces I've read on this subject don't predict that what I said should happen will actually happen.  The assumption has been that each delegation would go with a delegation party majority, rather than a statewide plurality.  If this assumption is true, then the House might pick Obama, right?  We can't predict what the congress that is sworn in on January 3 will look like, but there's a good chance that the Democrats will control 26 delegations.  I hope they don't do it that way, not because of any particular candidate or party, but I think that a delegation should respect the wishes of its constituents.  That would lead to the 25 to 25 tie.  That is not necessarily a problem, because the Senate would be meeting on January 6 to pick a Vice President, and that Vice President would be sworn in on January 20 as President if the House cannot pick a President in the 2-week period leading up to January 20.  Now, it's possible that we could have a 50-50 vote in the Senate.  That would be interesting.  I'd love to see it.  A 25-25 House and a 50-50 senate.  Imagine all the threads and bickering and excitement that would ensue in this forum.  Especially when President Boehner is sworn in on January 20.  :)

The House is voting per state delegations, essentially representing the states. Therefore, the House should most definitely not select Obama.

It wouldn't, because the House will be divided in state delegations and then each state delegation will have one voice. The State delegations should follow the popular vote decision in their states.

They should, but almost all the paid talking heads say that instead they'll go with the delegation majority.  Of course, paid talking heads make lots of predictions that don't come true.

If the Dems keep the Senate, it's plausible that there could be some sort of absurd Romney-Biden Administration in this situation.

This is a reason why the Constitution should be amended to revoke Congress's power to break an Electoral College deadlock.

Congress needs to learn to shut its yip when we say so.

Fine. Give Obama all swing states except for FL and NC. Give those to Romney. Obama wins 26 states to Romney's 24. What then? You know the Republicans would still deny Obama a second term.

The worst gridlock ever.

Assuming that the vote is strictly party-line, how would this end up looking?

Using Larry Sabato's ratings for House races (probably not the best, but the most amenable for a quick analysis of this sort of thing as he actually lists the safe districts):

Romney appears to have 24 states in the bag already, to Obama's 11:

()

Some of these "tossups" lean heavily in one direction, however.  Kristi Noem (SD-AL) won narrowly over Herseth-Sandlin last time around, but is not facing her again and has the advantage of incumbency; other sites list Noem as safe.  If we give SD to Romney, that puts him at 25 states, one state away from victory.  North Dakota's and Montana's current Congressmen are both retiring to run for Senate, but their seats are likely to remain Republican.  If just one of them remains Republican, Romney has 26 states and the Presidency.

Other possible Romney states from the remaining `tossups' are Michigan (they would need to retain MI-3 and MI-11) and Wisconsin (they would need to retain WI-7 and WI-8), probably followed by New Hampshire (where they would have to win both seats).

All in all, the House is basically Safe Romney assuming no defections.  Considering the only strongly Obama state in the above is Pennsylvania (which Romney doesn't even need should the Republicans hold onto Montana and the Dakotas), such a possibility seems remote.

The House will boot obama. Doh.

President Romney and Vice President Joe Biden

I smell a sitcom! 

In all seriousness, yeah, this would be the result of an electoral college tie.

Partially-related and extremely far-fetched Constitutional question:

What if there is no majority in the Electoral College for either President or Vice-President, and a single person happens to be eligible for election by the Senate to the Vice-Presidency and by the House to the Presidency?

I'm imagining a rather outlandish scenario where there is a 269-269 tie and one elector decides to go faithless and flips the ticket, voting Ryan/Romney instead of Romney/Ryan.  The Senate then has to decide between Ryan and Biden (the two top-placing candidates), while the House has to decide between Obama, Romney, and Ryan (the three top-placing candidates).  Is there some ludicrous scenario in which Ryan gets elected both Vice-President (by a Republican Senate, say) and President (there is a deadlocked House that somehow finds Ryan preferable to either candidate, or is deadlocked for so long Vice-President elect Ryan serves as Acting President and the House eventually decides to formalize the arrangement by electing him President)?

The Republicans have a built in advantage in the House, largely due to more states being gerrymandered in their favour than the Democrats.

In the incoming House, the Republicans will control probably 28-30 state delegations. No one would dare not vote the party line, so a 269-269 tie is a certain Romney win.

For the House to elect Obama would require some very unlikely Democratic pickups, the sort of wave that would see them retake the House and there's no evidence of that.

Obama wins the electoral college then.

Even if just the GOP lead house delegations from states won by Romney voted for Romney he would still  win. Those folks can easily justify their votes by saying they are voting along with the will of their states (and likely their CDs).

Because the popular vote is irrelevant. If the election was about the popular vote then the campaign would be different and we don't know who would win it. It's an interesting but irrevlevant piece of data. The House should select who they think will be the best President. And I'm assuming a majority of delegations will think Romeny fits that bill, if a majority are Republican.

sh**t, you're right. Oops, miscounted.

The House would vote largely along strict party lines. That being said, many representatives would be under a lot of pressure from their constituents to vote the way their district or their state voted. Of course you would also hear the argument that the House should respect the national popular vote. Some Congressmen from swing states/ districts would certainly take their "country first" points even in the face of threats from the party leadership. Still, these defections would probably not be enough to change the result. Republicans will almost definitely still control the House AND a majority of state delegations. Yes, Democrats will gain some seats. It would take a while to figure out the exact configuration of seats D's would have to win to control a majority of state delegations or produce a deadlocked result, but I can't imagine its a very likely outcome. Also, all the plausible electoral college tie scenarios involve Romney winning more states, so even if every representative voted the way their state voted, Romney would still win.

If Romney won the popular vote, then this would be seen as a clean victory. If however Obama won the popular vote but House Republicans chose Romney, well there's just no way to disguise that as anything other than the blatant partisan power grab that much of the public would view it as. Sure, Boehner could give an effective speech on the House floor about congress doing its constitutional duty and explain why the popular vote is irrelevant in this scenario. That may be a defensible position, but consider this: In the two months between the election and the House vote, everyone's going to see a million variations of the following poll.
"What do you think your congressman should base their vote for President on: 1. Their party 2. The way their state voted, 3. The way their district voted, or 4. The national popular vote?"
What do you think the numbers would be on that question?

Republicans might need to cut some sort of deal to save face with the public. Maybe they would agree to hold a vote an an amendment abolishing the electoral college. Or maybe they'd agree to concede the Vice Presidency to Biden.

Which brings us to the Senate. Most projections now show Democrats narrowly holding the Senate. So we could potentially get a Romney/ Biden administration. But assuming the House has already elected Romney, how much popular support would there be for the idea of electing a Democratic VP just to screw with the President for the next four years. Again, this would probably depend on who won the popular vote. What if Romney won the popular vote? Depending on how close the Senate is, it might just take one or two Democrats playing the "Country first" card and defecting (*cough* Joe Manchin*cough*)to swing the vote to Ryan.

There's also room for shenanigans at other points in the process. For example, all it would take is one faithless Republican elector to throw Ron Paul's name into the ring.     

Surely the party leaders would come together and make a compromise, something like a Romney/Biden administration, but Romney appoints several Democrats to the cabinet and agrees not to repeal Obamacare.

Why would the GOP compromise, if they have the numbers in the House to take the presidency?  They'd elect Romney in the House, and (if the Dems still have a majority in the Senate) the Senate would make Biden VP.  Biden would of course be shut out of Cabinet meetings and the like, and would spend all his days presiding over the Senate, and acting as the 101st Senator.

The aftermath of the election and the leadup to both the electoral vote and the vote in the House would be a huge media circus, akin to the 2000 election fiasco.  There would probably be some faithless electors (some Ron Paul ninjas, perhaps), but none who would crossover and vote for the other party, which means that there'd still be no EC majority, and it would still go to Romney in the House.  The National Popular Vote compact would gain some traction, and there'd be a renewed push to pass it in state legislatures around the country, but GOP opposition to it would harden.

The Constitution was set up with the understanding states should vote in their citizens interest, if a tie then states should vote along their state results.   I would expect Romney to win about 30 states, so the House, voting by state, would and should elect him, regardless of the popular vote.

With 24 states in the page, three ties would, also, be decisive. Assuming the Democrats take MT-AL, ND-AL, and SD-AL, ties are still possible in NV, MN, IA, WI, NH, WA and MI.