If our Dem nominee was killed right before the 2004 election

[MoonRiver]

what would happen? Would we be able to nominate someone else or would the VP be the new nominee. This has happened to 2 senators over the last 4 years, so I think it's a distinct possibility, especially if * is way behind.

[madrchsod]

1. like before- we

should roll over and let the supremes rub our tummies and we`ll go to sleep. when we wake up we can face another 4 yrs of terror. that`s what we did the last time ,can we expect any different this time?
we would have to run the vice president ,there wouldn`t be time to do any different.
there`s a possibilty of a terrorist attack on the life of the canidate..why haven`t they caught the anthrax killer?

[cheezus]

2. wouldn't happen

They'd maybe off Kerry before the convention ala Bobby, but it would be folly to throw so much public sympathy behind the Democrats right before the election.

[Bozola]

12. You mean just like for Wellstone?

[dsc]

3. We vote for electors not candidates

so our electors could name whomever they pleased.

[MoonRiver]

5. But the popular vote precedes the electoral vote.

Who would be our candidate? This must have happened sometime in history. But then again, maybe not. Never has this country had to deal with such a horror of an adm. as the BFEE.

[dsc]

8. We would simply vote for the dead candidate

and vote the electors in. This would be much easier than in the case of the Senators.

[Adapter44]

6. Wrong

this was how the founders intended it to be, but modern pres elections are nothing more than selecting the person they will rubber stamp.

With the only person they are being told to rubber stamp being Bush, with a combination of green/socialists/etc liberal candidates the electoral votes would still only be given to one of the candidates running. Unfortunately it would probably be Bush.

[dsc]

7. No I am right

Many states have so called 'faithless' electors laws but that has never been litigated but is widely assumed to be unconstitutional. Once elected an elector is free to vote for the candidate he or she pleases. In 1988, a WV elector voted for Bentsen instead of Dukakis. In 2000, several senarios were put forth of having electors vote for the popular vote winner over all instead of Bush.

[Adapter44]

10. I still feel

they would just rubber stamp bush. Unconstitutional or not, it has been ignored for this long and I don't see it being addressed then either. Especially when you consider who is pulling the strings at the moment.

IF it were to go to the courts, however, there is a high chance they would rule that they must rubber stamp Bush. Just as they installed him in 00.

[dsc]

11. Certainly Bush's electors would rubber stamp him

as they should. But the Democratic ones would be free agents. My assumption is that they would be told who to vote for (either the second place person in the primaries or the VP nominee, or if it was possible the person who the nominee endorsed at the time of his death).

[Adapter44]

4. Record high green vote

possibly in the 40% area.

[citizen snips]

9. There is not a big chance of that happening.

Although if Kerry is the nominee he might die from his prostrate.

[patricia92243]

13. It should be candidate that came in second. They would more closely

represent the people. The VP candidate represents the choice of the candidate ONLY.

I fear a repeat of Robert Kennedy -if it looks like "someone" is losing.