It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.
I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.
In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.
Hmm....
I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?
Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.
If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.
And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.
What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.
And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the
Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.
It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.
Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.
If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!
But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?
Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????
The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?
The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.
Tell me moron, can you get your welfare without an ID?, Can you get your food stamps without an ID? Can you get money out of the bank without an ID? Can you get Booze without an ID? Can you get Cigarettes without an ID?
Establishing who you are to vote is far more important than any of those actions... There is no reason NOT TO HAVE AN ID
It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.
I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.
In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.
Hmm....
I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?
Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.
If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.
And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.
What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.
And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the
Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.
It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.
Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.
If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!
But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?
Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????
The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?
The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.
Tell me moron, can you get your welfare without an ID?, Can you get your food stamps without an ID? Can you get money out of the bank without an ID? Can you get Booze without an ID? Can you get Cigarettes without an ID?
Establishing who you are to vote is far more important than any of those actions... There is no reason NOT TO HAVE AN ID
Except the only people who are being told to get ID are Minorities.
BULL SHIT....
Provide a link and then tell me how they are receiving federal funds and services without one..
People who have money, have cars....And already have a driver's license.... a govt pictured ID.
ONLY those without a pictured govt I'D, have to go out and get one.
And if your indigent EVERY STATE gives you an ID for nothing... Now tell me again how these people recieve federal funds when EVERY APPLICATION REQUIRES ID? How do they cash their welfare checks?
Well, you're wrong.
If all of the people needed Govt pictured IDs, to do all those things that you claim....
Then they would already have one, but THEY DON'T.
They've lived their whole lives without one....And never had a problem....
My mother in law, at 70 years old, got her first govt issued picture I'D, when she learned to drive and got a car..... before that, she relied on my father in law, to drive everywhere.... but he died.... So she learned how to drive at 70 and did so, until she passed on, at 87.
You are not required to have a govt issued picture ID for Social Security, or welfare....You can get it, without a gvt pictured id....
Suburban and rural and cities all have people who do not have and have never had, gvt issued, pictured IDs.... court case after court case on this issue has established there are millions of voting age citizens who have never had or needed one.
After requiring these gvt pictured IDs to vote, Republicans in some states shut down 70% of their driver's licence bureaus, so to make it harder for these people who do not drive, to get to one.... without missing hours of work and needed money from working....
Giving them the ID for free IS good, but not the major cost....getting a copy of your birth certificate, money for transit to the DMV, and hours needed away from their hourly paid job....
Yes, it can eventually be done... And with changes, it won't be made harder on those without cars, to be able to vote...
But, a Big BUT.... I'll stick by what I said..... anyone who drives already, has no hurdles to jump, if they register to vote.... They have the I'D already, but those who do not drive, do have hurdles to jump, in order to vote, if they decide to.
constitutionus.com
