Meet the Press: Mike Bloomberg?

On today’s episode of Meet the Press, Tim Russert finally perks up to the looming Bloomberg factor.

7 Responses to “Meet the Press: Mike Bloomberg?”

D Says:
January 20th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
So here’s a question: They’re talking about winning a plurality of the electoral college, but doesn’t the Congress then decide who the President is going to be, and won’t the Congress be sufficiently partisan not to select the independent?
Andrew MacRae Says:
January 20th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
D, if no-one wins the electoral college, then the House of Representatives will choose the President from the top 3 recipients of electors. The interesting thing about this is that each state only has 1 vote. So all of California’s Representatives must make their decision and 1 vote is cast. I’m not sure what sort of majority within state delegations is required(either 50%+1 or the most votes), however, a majority of 50 state delegations would be required to win overall

The Senate chooses the Vice President by majority vote.

See the 12th Amendment for more details http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am12
D Says:
January 21st, 2008 at 12:05 am
Ok, this is useful. But assuming that the Representatives will vote along party lines, how is this a winning outcome for an independent? I was just wondering why the discussion on Meet the Press (and frankly elsewhere in the media) is in terms of Bloomberg aiming to win a simply plurality. That does not look to me like a winning proposition for him, though of course winning a majority of the college would be. Am I missing something? We might hope that the representatives would set aside party politics in order not to disenfranchise voters, but that seems a little optimistic to me.

The 12th amendment also seems to allow for real deadlock: suppose there is no majority in the resulting vote (in which the representatives from each state together only get one vote), then the VP acts as president; but the VP is chosen in a similar way by the Senate, which could be similarly deadlocked. I suppose this means the *previous* VP gets to be President? Maybe the prospect of President Cheney would force the House out of such a deadlock!

But the serious question behind all of this is still: given the party affiliation of the Representatives, can an independent really win with only a plurality?
D Says:
January 21st, 2008 at 1:12 am
Ok, I watched it again and Russert does say that he would be aiming for 271 electoral votes. That would do it.
Phil Wray Says:
January 21st, 2008 at 7:33 am
I am of the opinion if that it would go to the House to choose, that would be in Bloomberg’s favor. It would be sweet irony for our representatives to be in the same situation as us voters. So many people end up voting for what they believe is the lesser of two evils. I would think that the same would hold in the House. That state delegations would naturally come to see a centrist position as less evil than their extreme counterpart.
john milligan Says:
January 21st, 2008 at 10:27 am
That is another reason we need to have this Bloomie effort reach out BIG TIME to the vast Centrist organizations and entities out there - esp the Blue Dog Democrats and the Tuesday Group Republicans in Congress. In terms of both strategy and issues and just making the people comfortable with a Bloomie effort, reaching out and establishing such a relationship of trust will be essential for him to win as well as to govern effectively.
Michael White Says:
January 21st, 2008 at 6:42 pm
Firstly, they were talking about winning a majority of EC votes, not a plurality.

If it does go to the House, winning a state requires a majority of that state’s representatives who are voting.

One thing to consider is that they might choose to vote for whoever won the plurality in their state, so as to reflect the public will, rather than along party affiliations.

Lastly, the Republicans might throw their electoral votes to Bloomberg to prevent the Democrat from winning if the House was going to vote along party lines, before the contingent election could ever happen.