Thought Experiment - What if the shooter had succeeded ?

[JackOfNoTrades]

If the shooter had succeeded, Nikki Haley would be the candidate.

She should have been the candidate regardless. Had it been Haley across from Biden the night of the debate, the election would be all but decided.

 

[Kondor3]

She should have been the candidate regardless. Had it been Haley across from Biden the night of the debate, the election would be all but decided.

Yes. Agreed. In a sane world Haley would have been the ideal candidate. I still have hopes for her in 2028. We'll see.

 

[Skylar]

/---/ You can not delay a presidential election - ever.

Depends on what you mean by the 'election'. The actual election day isn't laid out in the constitution. In fact, there's no mention of the people voting for the president in the constitution. Instead, its determined by the State Legislatures, who can choose any method they see fit.

Congress sets certain fixed dates for counting and the electoral college.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Depends on what you mean by the 'election'. The actual election day isn't laid out in the constitution. In fact, there's no mention of the people voting for the president in the constitution. Instead, its determined by the State Legislatures, who can choose any method they see fit.

Congress sets certain fixed dates for counting and the electoral college.

/----/ As posted earlier: Does the Constitution allow for a delayed presidential election? | Constitution Center
In general, a combination of state or congressional actions could delay elections but not postpone the selection of a president and vice president. The only hard deadline spelled out in the Constitution is the end of a president’s term and a vice president’s term on January 20 of the year following a general election. (That same deadline applies regardless of term limits imposed on the president under the 22nd Amendment.)

The Constitution’s text requires that a group of electors, commonly called the Electoral College, chooses the next president. If a majority of electors fails to agree on a winner, Congress picks the winner in continent elections held within Congress under the terms of the 12th Amendment.

 

[Skylar]

/----/ As posted earlier:
In general, a combination of state or congressional actions could delay elections but not postpone the selection of a president and vice president. The only hard deadline spelled out in the Constitution is the end of a president’s term and a vice president’s term on January 20 of the year following a general election. (That same deadline applies regardless of term limits imposed on the president under the 22nd Amendment.)

The Constitution’s text requires that a group of electors, commonly called the Electoral College, chooses the next president. If a majority of electors fails to agree on a winner, Congress picks the winner in continent elections held within Congress under the terms of the 12th Amendment.

The election day and the selection of the president and VP are two different things. The election day is a collected legal contrivance by 50 of 50 States who have individually agreed that their method of selecting their electors is through some form of the popular vote. They've also agreed, 50 of 50 times and independently, on what election day is. They agree. But they don't have to.

There's nothing that constitutionally mandates this. The states could by direct vote of the state legislatures. Or assign electors from a hat. Or pick alphabetically. As long as their certificates of ascertainment are delivered before the electors vote at the electoral college...and their electors show up and vote there, its constitutionally valid.

The selection of the president and vice president isn't the election, constitutionally speaking. Its the electoral college vote, read by the head of the senate. And even that has to be done on any day before january 20th.

You can absolutely delay election day if you need to. You could even push the electoral college voting day, as long you didn't push past January 20th. That's the only constitutionally mandated date in this process.

 

[Cellblock2429]

The election day and the selection of the president and VP are two different things. The election day is a collected legal contrivance by 50 of 50 States who have individually agreed that their method of selecting their electors is through some form of the popular vote. They've also agreed, 50 of 50 times and independently, on what election day is. They agree. But they don't have to.

There's nothing that constitutionally mandates this. The states could by direct vote of the state legislatures. Or assign electors from a hat. Or pick alphabetically. As long as their certificates of ascertainment are delivered before the electors vote at the electoral college...and their electors show up and vote there, its constitutionally valid.

The selection of the president and vice president isn't the election, constitutionally speaking. Its the electoral college vote, read by the head of the senate. And even that has to be done on any day before january 20th.

You can absolutely delay election day if you need to. You could even push the electoral college voting day, as long you didn't push past January 20th. That's the only constitutionally mandated date in this process.

/----/ Name one time that election day was postponed.

 

[Skylar]

/----/ Name one time that election day was postponed.

Its never happened. There's no constitutional reason why it couldn't, though. There's no where in the constitution where an 'election day' by the people is mandated to happen at all for President or VP. Let alone mandated to happen on a specific day. Or even mentioned.

The electors are assigned by the state legislatures per the constitution. Its the state legislatures that have CHOSEN 50 of 50 times and individually, to use some form of the popular vote on a particular day.

This is not mandated nor mentioned in the constitution. And could absolutely be changed, as long as the selection of President and Vice President was complete by the electoral college by January 20th.

 

[Skylar]

/----/ As posted earlier: Does the Constitution allow for a delayed presidential election? | Constitution Center
In general, a combination of state or congressional actions could delay elections but not postpone the selection of a president and vice president. The only hard deadline spelled out in the Constitution is the end of a president’s term and a vice president’s term on January 20 of the year following a general election. (That same deadline applies regardless of term limits imposed on the president under the 22nd Amendment.)

The Constitution’s text requires that a group of electors, commonly called the Electoral College, chooses the next president. If a majority of electors fails to agree on a winner, Congress picks the winner in continent elections held within Congress under the terms of the 12th Amendment.

Your own source confirms my point. The election day could be delayed or postponed. But the presidential and vice presidential SELECTION deadline of January 20th cannot.

The election day can absolutely be moved.

 

[HikerGuy83]

It raises a question, does/did the republican party have a plan B if Trump was assassinated before the election?

That is pretty much the heart of the thread.

What if he strokes out and dies ? Is there a plan B.

 

[HikerGuy83]

/---/ You can not delay a presidential election - ever.

What makes you say that ?

 

[Cellblock2429]

What makes you say that ?

/---/ I've posted the answer and link twice. See #164

 

[M14 Shooter]

Liberals would cheer.
Publicly.

 

[HikerGuy83]

/---/ I've posted the answer and link twice. See #164

What I read is that the election could be held on Jan 15th as long as he is sworn in by a certain date.

 

[berg80]

I have to wonder:

Would things have calmed down ?

Would there have been clashes ? It was reported that shortley afterwards, some of the crowd started menacing the press box until cooler heads prevailed ?

What would the GOP have done ?

Would the election have been delayed to give the GOP time to chose a new candidate (and of course, the same question comes up....what if Joe Biden dies of a heart attack on September 1st ?).

I am voting for Trump and I want him to win.

But I don't want a civil war.

I also can't think of who would take his place. It forces to me to really wonder what it is that DJT can do that nobody else can do.

Just wondering.

If the shooter had succeeded, as Gerry Ford said, our long national nightmare would be over.

 

[HikerGuy83]

If the shooter had succeeded, as Gerry Ford said, our long national nightmare would be over.

You apparently missed the point of the thread, but that isn't unusual for you.

Trump was elevated out of need.

He may go away, but the need still exists.

There are some who might fill his shoes and make your nightmare worse.

 

[krichton]

You nearly spelt your username correctly -

The Crichton | We connect people, place and the past to shape the future

An 85 acre estate in the heart of Dumfries, The Crichton Trust work alongside local community to preserve the heritage of this historic site.

www.crichton.co.uk

Keep at it. One of these days you’ll find something really clever to post on here.

 

[krichton]

If the shooter had succeeded, as Gerry Ford said, our long national nightmare would be over.

He’s not wrong.

 

[AntonToo]

I have to wonder:

Would things have calmed down ?

F no things would not have come down.

If Trump actualy got killed our democracy would be greatly undermined and probably ultimately lead to murder of a Democrat politician and god knows what else from there.

Very dangerous road to go down.

 

[HikerGuy83]

He’s not wrong.

Trump might have gone away, but not MAGA and not the person who filled his shoes.

Trump is no threat to democracy and the left is even now admitting that is BS Rhetoric you guys have pushed because you can't win on policy.

 

[krichton]

I trust 60+ court cases shown the door. Multiple recounts and audits in the swing states in question (garnering more votes for the declared winner). Even internal party audits in states like Michigan that found ZERO evidence of widespread fraud.
It was a lie perpetrated by the loser. And it has contributed to the bile and rancor that we see now.

Even in the red states that are hopelessly gerrymandered beyond reason, I don't question the integrity of their election officials and volunteers.

What's funny is that Trump hired two investigative firms to come up with some evidence of fraud, and they completely contradicted by saying they could find none. Trump basically proved himself a liar, what a loser.