What happens if one or more Senators DO stand up?

[Zan_of_Texas]

I know the Joint Session would break into House and Senate, and discuss for two hours.

But, then what? What are the possible outcomes?

They discuss, then vote whether to accept the Ohio electors?

If they accept, what have we accomplished?

If they reject the Ohio electors (seems highly unlikely given the lockstep Republican unity enforced by The Hammer Tom DeLay), then what would happen?

What is the math of electors required for election?


Are we fighting this just for the two-hour discussion? Is that what is on the line?

[Options Remain]

1. its no longer ignorable.

thats all.

[RoeBear]

2. My prediction

we'll never know

[Oversea Visitor]

3. Possible scenarioes

Republicians stand with Democrats to overturn electors vote just enough to change President.

Everyone own me a beer if this happen.

[hootinholler]

11. Ok

Everyone own me a beer if this happen

All your beer are belong to me.

-Hoot

[Oversea Visitor]

14. Hmmm

Come on lets share it. This is a possible exit strategy. Something big is going down. All I know is Bush Jr got a :spank:

[molly]

4. DeLay is backpeddling - he must be afraid of something

[RubyCat]

5. It would force Kerry to show his hand. No more playing coy.

He needs to tell us clearly where he stands on election fraud. No more of the "nuance" BS. No more trying to be all things to all people. If he doesn't want to fight the fraud, then he needs to bite the bullet and say he doesn't have our backs. And then he needs to deal with the voters losing respect for him and the damage to his political career.

[theboss]

6. He'll be in a tent in Iraq

Maybe he can fax his stance.

[Walt Starr]

7. IF a majority of Senators do not join into the contesting of the electors

the electors stand and the vote is certified.

In other words, nothing happens except the Senators who contest the electors end their political career.

[theboss]

8. I've never understood the rationale for this Jan 6 "showdown"

It feels like the ending of "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid."

[Walt Starr]

9. YEEEEEEEHAAAAAAWWWW

Let's go down shootin' in a blaze of glory!!!!!

[mary195149]

10. These last few paragraphs of this article

explain what can happen.

http://www.redefeatbush.com/downloads/insurrection.pdf

[Walt Starr]

12. .

[mdb]

13. The choice is?

Both houses of Congress have to agree to the objections to the electoral vote that are signed by at least one Senator and one Representative.

If both houses do agree, the objection stands and the disputed votes are not counted.

If after the objections dealt with, no candidate has a majority (now 270) of electoral votes, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution requires that the House and Senate must choose the president and vice president under a procedure formally called a "Contingent Election."

In the Contingent Election, the House chooses the president while the Senate chooses the vice president.

In the House, votes for president are cast by state, with each state getting one vote. A simple majority -- 26 states -- wins.

In the Senate, the vote for vice president is taken member-by-member. A majority -- 51 Senators -- wins.

[Zan_of_Texas]

15. Thank you for the clarification.

[yodermon]

16. Questions:

1) if OH's electoral votes are disqualified, and shrub is left w/ 266 votes, he will still have more votes than Kerry, w/252. Is it clear (Constitutionally) that this is sufficient to throw the election to the House/Senate? Or can it be declared that shrub simply wins 266 - 252?
IOW, is it open to interpretation, or does everyone know & agree that the election gets thrown to congress?

2) How does each state in the House allocate its votes? i.e. 440 reps for 51 states? Simple majority from each state?

Hope this is clear, and thanks! :hi:

[yodermon]

25. shameless kick to get my quesiton answered

:) :kick:

[m.standridge]

18. Surely this would mean Bush would win anyway

since there are 26 Bush loyalists in the US House of Representatives?
Unless you're telling me McCain has some votes? What if McCain has two votes, one each in two states? Then Bush has 24, not a majority.
Kerry was communicating quite a bit with McCain.

[mulethree]

21. McCain?

They have to vote for Bush, Kerry or Edwards - the top 3
electoral college finishers for president. They get to pick from Cheney and Edwards for VP (only finishers).

If it was going that way, then it might be possible for someone to
challenge that one stray Edwards for President vote - if that was a state that requires electors to follow the peoples vote. But if it was state law they would presumably have fixed it already.

[texpatriot2004]

17. kick

[m.standridge]

19. The only positive, this would be a deadly serious, first time thing

No Senator has ever contested an Elector before.

If it's that serious, and this is on TV, the GOP might have to take it somewhat seriously.

Would they begin to unravel around the edges? McCain, Specter...

[sepia_steel]

20. That scenerio

is really all I want. Public awareness. That's all. :(

[SicTransit]

22. "No Senator has ever contested an Elector before."

Wrong.

[mulethree]

23. See 1969 - not similar but a senator objecting

In 1969 there was a faithless elector from N.C. who was
pledged to Nixon but didn't vote for him (?for Wallace?)

Nixon won.

The loosing VP candidate - Muskie from Maine, was a Senator
and objected to that one elector. Was joined by several from
both the Senate and the House.

Sounds like they had a great debate and ended up accepting the elector's 'bad' vote.

Wish I could find out who else signed the objection. But Muskie didn't seem to suffer for it.

GHW Bush and Ford both voted for the vote to stand, to let the faithless guy vote against their candidate Nixon, though it might have been different if they were one vote away from a tie. N.C. has a law requiring electors to 'keep faith' but theres much doubt as to whether that is constitutional. The congress seemed to think they have no right to not respect his vote.

[rhite5]

24. Two results I see even if nothing gets changed .....

• At least going through this process (all the way) will force this action into the official record for posterity.

• It is significant enough to force some sort of media coverage and acknowledgment that there are some real problems with our election system and hopefully that will lead to much broader discussion.

If we do not do this, I see little point in voting in the future, let alone working for any campaigns. I do not think I am alone.

[katinmn]

26. there are a number of recommendations at the end of Conyers'

report. They better start acting on them.