Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

CK_John

(10,005 posts)
Sat Aug 4, 2012, 10:05 AM Aug 2012

Since the VP and the POTUS cannot be from the same state, is this

limiting Mitt's selection process? I hope so and it might also be a factor in Mitt not releasing his forms, I think he took resident benefits in several states at once.

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

rfranklin

(13,200 posts)
1. Can the POTUS be from two different states?
Sat Aug 4, 2012, 10:09 AM
Aug 2012

Mitt has total freedom since he has the ability to retroactively renounce his residency in any state.

unblock

(52,183 posts)
2. actually, they can. there's just a small electoral penalty if they are.
Sat Aug 4, 2012, 10:27 AM
Aug 2012

"The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not lie an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves."


the restriction is that, in the electoral college, electors can't vote for both a president and a vice-president from the same state as the elector. not the same state as each other -- all three have to be from the same state for it to be a problem.


so if the president and vice-president on one ticket are from the same state, then for the electors from the rest of the country, this is no problem because they're voting for two out-of-staters. it's only a problem for the electors from the same state as both the president and vice-president. in that state, they would vote for the president and vote for some random out-of-stater for vice president (essentially throwing away that vote).

so the presidential election would not be affected, but the vice-presidential race would. this is only a problem in a very close race where that one state made the difference. in which case the president would be elected as normal but there would be no vice-presidential victor as neither candidate had the required 270 electoral votes. in which case the election would be thrown to the house of representatives. in normal times they would likely let the president have his own vice-presidential choice, given that that was apparently the peoples' choice as well, but in these hyper-partisan times it's conceivable that they'd give it to the other guy or even to someone else entirely.

CK_John

(10,005 posts)
3. Then why was Cheney moved to Wy is a big haste. Also both are voted
Sat Aug 4, 2012, 10:34 AM
Aug 2012

on a a unit. They use to be seperate and there were some elected from different parties.

But... the working theory is they have to be from seperate states. Only Ron Paul worries about these things.

unblock

(52,183 posts)
5. well you never know if it's going to make the difference, and texas has a lot of electoral votes.
Sat Aug 4, 2012, 10:40 AM
Aug 2012

but with two candidates from alaska or d.c., it hardly matters.

the tradition is probably more important. the idea was to encourage some geographical diversity and even though the penalty is small, voters probably wouldn't like violating that principle.

 

nanabugg

(2,198 posts)
4. So can we just say the only "voter fraud" that we know of has been committed by the GOP elite?
Sat Aug 4, 2012, 10:36 AM
Aug 2012

Coulter
Cheney
Romney
_______

________

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Since the VP and the POTU...