what happens if neither Obama nor Romney get 270?

[DonCoquixote]

I know that there are tons of electoral maps. It has become a game, slap a state red or blue and see what sort of otoal you get, or more likely, to figure out what Obama needs to get to 270.

What makes me ask a question is a fact: there are many states that are toss ups. Yes,polls in states like Florida, Ohio, North Carolina favor Obama, but polls cannot take into account the damper voter ID laws have put on the nation. The fact is, whatever reason people had for their "protest vote" in 2010, the people that got hit were the poor, elderly, students and immigrants. The GOp has no shame about the fact they tried to do this at the last minute, and the media so wants that Pac Money that they dare not call them out on it.

So, what happens if, after all the votes are counted, there is NOT a clear answer. All it would take is one scandal in one of the swing states to muddle the waters with gray. What happens if neither of these two score a clear knockout.

I know the short answer is scotus, but dare scotus get involved, knowing that Bush V Gore is still Raw? Does the House award it toMitt, knowing that Mitt will have probably lost the popular vote. I do think Obama willput up a better fight than Gore, but I also know Gore did not have billion dollar donors to fight.

What happens?

[still_one]

1. The house decides it

[slackmaster]

6. First reply nails it

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii#section1

[bemildred]

19. The "new" house decides it.

Yet another reason to take back the house.

[Scuba]

2. Tony Scalia arm wrestles Sonja Sotomayer for the win.

[Xipe Totec]

3. It's not going to be even close

Romney and Ryan will be crushed like cockroaches, cornered and then smashed with pointy boots.

[ellenfl]

7. before or after the repugs hack the computers? eom

[Xipe Totec]

9. Before, and after

It's going to be an elephant slaughter

[ellenfl]

13. from your lips to fsm's ears. eom

[Xipe Totec]

15. Ramen nt

[ThomThom]

17. sometimes I wonder if Rmoney is throwing it so all he has to do is flip the vote

if he knows he will lost they will just switch the numbers so total ballots doesn't change
he is going to lose so bad no one would believe it so it should be a none starter

[Curtland1015]

4. It goes to penalty kicks.

If its still tied? Dance off!

[WilliamPitt]

5. I will eat my hat.

[Speck Tater]

8. Thunderdome? Extra innings? Overtime? American Idol? nt

[regnaD kciN]

10. I don't know if it's even possible...

You'd need each candidate to win exactly 269 EV, and I'm not sure, given how the votes are allocated to each state, that there's a combination that would split the vote that way.

Situations where the House might be called on to decide an election have usually hinged, not on a EV tie, but on a race where a third-party candidate might take enough states to prevent any candidate from getting 270 EV. The last time that happened was in 1968, where it was thought that George Wallace might win enough southern states to deny either Nixon or Humphrey an EV majority. In a race without a strong third-party candidate, such as we have now, the chances of neither candidate making it to 270 EV is virtually infinitesimal.

[exboyfil]

11. There are 269/269 combinations

especially if you figure the states which split their electoral votes. You also have the possibility of a faithless elector(s) throwing it into the House.

Given how close 2000 was, I would not be too quick to discount the possibility. I don't think it will happen this time though.

[DonCoquixote]

12. Thanks for the answers, but

I still think there is a lot to ponder...

First, this election can be appear close, especially in the swing states. Many thought 2000 would not happen, yet it did.

My main worry is the House, as frankly, the House is the most blatantly corrupt bunch, and the home of the Tea Party. Even if Obama had more EV, but not the 270, would they actually hand it to Mitt? Would there be any recourse?

[Orangepeel]

14. a candidate can win with less than 270

The candidate with the most EVs wins, unless it is a tie and then the house decides. If state electors didn't vote or if a third party candidate happened to win some electoral votes, then the winner could win with less than 270. But those scenarios are even less likely than a tie, which is extremely unlikely.

It is not inconceivable that an electoral college member wouldn't vote -- one of Gore's DC voters didn't vote as a protest against the lack of congressional representation for DC (but only because it didn't make a difference after Florida was awarded to bush) -- and I wouldn't be shocked if one of Romney's ended up voting for Ron Paul (I don't have any reason to believe that except a feeling that Paulites are sneaky and Romney electors will be mad at him). But stuff like that only happens when a candidate can't win anyway.

The house only has a say when it is a tie. The senate counts the electoral votes and the new senate will be sworn in by then. But even if we lose the senate, which we are currently not projected to do, they aren't going to ignore the real votes. Biden will still be presiding and it will be on CSPAN and that would be the least likely scenario yet.

In 2000, before the supreme court awarded florida's electoral votes to bush, the Florida House threatened to nullify the results of the popular election and certify bush as the winner of their votes anyway. It never came to them trying because of the SCOTUS, so that particular constitutional kerfluffle was sidelined. I guess theoretically, Koch controlled state legislatures could try that.

But the republican powers that be don't like Romney enough to step in that shit for him. If they didn't do it for McCain, they aren't going to do it for Romney.

[onenote]

16. The House could have a say even if its not a tie

The Twelfth Amendment specifies that the election of the President is made by the House whenever none of the candidates receiving electoral votes receives a majority of "the whole number of electors appointed." Thus, if the electors split 269 -268 -1 (with one elector not voting or voting for a third party candidate) the election shifts to the House.

The process in the House involves polling the 50 state delegations (but not DC, even though three electors are from DC) and if a majority of the delegations support one candidate over another, then that candidate is elected President. How each delegation votes is determined by a vote within the delegation. Thus, for example, a state with more republican members of Congress probably will support the Republican candidate (even if the state's popular and electoral votes went to the Democratic candidate) and vice versal.

Currently, the repubs have a comfortable lead in state delegations (32-16 with two delegations evenly split). However, if the presidential election is thrown into the House, the decision (by virtue of the 20th Amendment) will be made by the newly elected House,not the previous House. That still leaves open the very real possibility that one party might be in the minority in the House but still control a majority of the state delegations.

Finally, if the election ends up the same way for Vice President, that decision is made by the Senate, with a vote of 51 of the Senators needed to make the selection. Thus, it is theoretically possible for there to be a president from one party and a VP from the other.

[Bucky]

21. There would be no recourse. If there's an EC tie, the House decides

If the Dems can get a winning vote out of 25 states, then the VP casts the tie breaking vote. There's no way to predict how a loose cannon like Biden would vote if it came down to that.

[kctim]

18. A nation on the brink

A Romney or Obama win that is not a landslide will only further divide our country. So bad that we will be only a step or two from mass violence.

[Bucky]

20. I believe the constitution calls for a sledgehammer cage match

This is why Democrats are wise to nominate younger men than the Republicans, because they already have the advantage in who's meaner.