> > Presidential elections will become a thing of the past. Here's how it will happen.
> > 1. Florida legislature will vote to by-pass the voters and name delegates to the electorial college. Their electorial votes will be for Bush.
> >
> > 2.The Tennessee legislature will vote to do the same. Their electorial votes will be for Gore. This works because the Tennessee legislature is largely democrats, but the voters went for Bush. This takes 11 votes out of the Bush column and puts them in Gore's column. Gore, Tennessee's favorite son, becomes president.
> >
> > 3.In 2004, the candidates all campaign before the state legislatures of all 50 states. The legislatures vote for their electorial delegates and a new president is chosen. No general election necessary.
> >
> > Hey, it could happen!
> > Howard
>
> The state supreme courts would overturn it in a heartbeat.

(HM) I'm not sure the Tennessee Supreme court would, especially if Florida got away with it.

The US supreme court would, if they didn't. Congress would pass a constitutional amendment overnight revising the electoral college.

(HM)All right! Now we're getting somewhere!

> Another possible scenario: swinging electors. If the electoral vote stays at 271 to 267, a few Bush electors swinging could make all the difference. The electors aren't required by law to vote for the candidate they were elected for, so it's possible some electors might switch over. 2 democratic electors have admitted to considering the possibility. It's happened only a few times before-one elector chose Ronald Reagan over Gerald Ford when Reagan wasn't even on the ballot.

(HM)A number of states have laws binding their electorials to the chosen candidate, but about half do not. So it's possible, but unlikely.

> Since Gore will likely get the popular vote and Bush the electoral, an elector for Bush might conceivable change his/her mind and vote.
>
> One other thing-in Texas, electors might not be able to choose both Bush as president and Dick Cheney as vice president. It depends on whether or not they are legally residents from the same state. There's a provision in the constitution that electors may not select a president and a vice president from the same state. If the courts decide that both may not be chosen, we could conceivably have Bush as president and Leiberman as vice president. Talk about bi-partisanship.
>
> Mark"I know, you've all missed me"N

(HM) I think I could live with a Leiberman-Bush ticket! Chaney is a Texan, but like many filthy rich people he has homes in more than one state. I believe he switched his legal residence to Montana or Wyoming just to get around that provision. Former president George Bush ran as a candidate from Texas, but lived in New England. When visiting Texas he usually stayed in a hotel and used it for a legal address. Personally, having president and vice president from the same state, doesn't bother me. But the constitution is the law of the land. I don't think what he did was ethical.
Howard