Presidential Election Of 1824

The Theoretical Possibility Of A Romney-Biden White House

Ronald Leave a comment

IF by some chance, the electoral vote would be evenly divided 269-269, the House of Representatives, likely to have more states with a Republican majority delegation, would then get to choose the President, as they did in 1800 and 1824, and would then choose Mitt Romney, their party’s nominee.

But if the Democrats continued to control the US Senate, then Vice President Joe Biden would be likely to be chosen, and we would have a split White House, which we only had after the 1796 election, when Thomas Jefferson was the opponent of John Adams, and ended up as his unhappy Vice President, and then defeated him in a tumultuous election in 1800.

The 12th Amendment in 1804 was supposed to prevent such an eventuality again, but it is possible, but highly unlikely, that such a scenario could happen.

This would be bad for America, as certainly Romney and Biden would not get along, and it is well known that Biden has ambitions to run for President in 2016, and would likely oppose President Romney on every issue imaginable, as they might be opponents in 2016, when Romney would run for reelection.

It is interesting to think about this, but no one should worry, as the odds of a tie of 269-269 is highly remote, and every indication from the “swing states” and Nate Silver in the NY Times is that Barack Obama will win the Electoral College without any problem, and win most of the contested states, as many other polls also indicate!

Will 2012 Presidential Election Mirror 2000 Presidential Election?

Ronald 1 Comment

There is a growing possibility that the Presidential Election of 2012 will become a reprise of the Presidential Election Of 2000, where the winner of the popular vote does not win the Electoral College, and therefore does not become President of the United States.

This time, the Democratic incumbent, Barack Obama, would be the lucky recipient, while last time the Republican candidate, George W. Bush, was to become the fourth Presidential nominee to fail to win the popular vote but become President, after John Quincy Adams in 1824, Rutherford Hayes in 1876, and Benjamin Harrison in 1888.

Some would say that such a result, with Obama being reelected, although losing the popular vote to Mitt Romney, the Republican nominee, would be “justice” for what happened to Al Gore, the Democratic nominee in 2000.

But there is a major difference, in that Obama is already President, while Bush was competing for the position, but was not yet our President.

It would be the first time that a sitting President was reelected without the popular vote of the American people, and would make Republicans say he was “illegitimate” to be our President, something already said, but still would be a great tragedy,and probably guarantee another four years of stalemate and gridlock.

It would make, more likely, a move by the Republicans, if they controlled the House of Representatives, which seems likely at this point, to move to impeach the President, as they succeeded in doing to Bill Clinton in 1998.

It would be a political circus, which would paralyze the nation, and the Republican Party would do everything it could to undermine Obama, and to attempt to make it seem as if he was a failed President, to stain his name in history, even if they had been unable to dislodge him from the White House.

It is hoped that this whole scenario will not happen, and that Barack Obama will end up winning the popular vote, but with the impending Hurricane Sandy, likely to cut down voting totals in the Northeast and Midwest, considered strongly Democratic at least in the Northeast, it could assist Romney in winning the national popular vote, and even the Electoral College win is certainly possible for Romney, although still considered unlikely.

With the impending storm, there is a lot to pray for, regarding safety of the population in the Northeast and Midwest, as well as the future of the nation after the Presidential Election Of 2012. We are living in very difficult times, and have to hope for reason and tolerance, without any certainty of either occurring!

President Vs. President In Presidential Elections: 14 Times and 20 Presidents

Ronald Leave a comment

On George Washington’s actual birthday, 280 years ago (1732), it is appropriate to ask how many times has there been a Presidential election in which two Presidents opposed each other?

The answer is 14 times, and a total of 20 Presidents have competed against a fellow Oval Office occupant, present or future!

Here are the details:

Presidential Elections of 1796 and 1800–John Adams vs Thomas Jefferson, with Adams first winning, and then Jefferson.

Presidential Elections Of 1824 and 1828–John Quincy Adams vs Andrew Jackson, with Adams first winning (even though behind Jackson in popular votes), and then Jackson.

Presidential Elections of 1836 and 1840–Martin Van Buren vs William Henry Harrison, with Van Buren first winning, and then Harrison.

Presidential Elections of 1888 and 1892–Benjamin Harrison vs Grover Cleveland, with Harrison first winning (even though behind Cleveland in popular votes), and then Cleveland.

Presidential Election Of 1912–the only time three Presidents, past, present and future, ran against each other, with Woodrow Wilson defeating President William Howard Taft and former President Theodore Roosevelt (running on a third party line, the Progressive Party).

Presidential Election of 1932–Herbert Hoover vs Franklin D. Roosevelt, with FDR winning.

Presidential Election of 1960–John F. Kennedy vs Richard Nixon, with JFK winning, but Nixon later winning the Presidency in 1968.

Presidential Election of 1976–Jimmy Carter vs Gerald Ford, with Carter defeating President Ford.

Presidential Election of 1980–President Jimmy Carter vs Ronald Reagan, with Reagan defeating President Carter.

Presidential Election Of 1992–President George H. W. Bush vs Bill Clinton, with Clinton defeating President Bush.

Of these 20 Presidents, only Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton–a total of five–never lost to their Presidential competitor, although it could be pointed out that FDR lost the Vice Presidency in 1920, a race that Warren G. Harding won for the White House, and that Ronald Reagan lost the Republican nomination for President to Gerald Ford in 1976!

So another trivia contest for those who are interested!

Nate Silver Gives Odds For Republican Presidential Candidates A Year Before The Presidential Election

Ronald 1 Comment

Nate Silver of the NEW YORK TIMES on Friday explained, according to his statistical model, the odds of any GOP candidate for President having the opportunity to win the popular vote in the 2012 Presidential Election..

Note he does not say that any of these candidates will win the election, because, of course, the Electoral College will decide who wins the White House, and four times the popular vote loser nationally (1824, 1876, 1888, 2000) has won the election.

According to his model, the best candidate with the most opportunity to win is Jon Huntsman, the former Utah Governor and Ambassador to China, who has so far made no dent in the public opinion polls.

And yet, Silver’s argument is that with a 2.5% growth of the economy in 2012, a fairly tepid growth thought to be the most likely and best scenario, Huntsman has a 71 percent chance of winning the popular vote, as compared to 58 percent for Mitt Romney. No other candidate can win under this model, with Herman Cain having a 41 percent chance, Rick Perry a 30 percent chance, and Michele Bachmann having a 12 percent chance.

IF there is a stalled economy with no growth, Huntsman’s chances rise to 90 percent, Romney to 83 percent, Cain to 70 percent, Perry to 59 percent, and Bachmann to 34 percent.

If GDP grows only 2.3 percent instead of 2.5 percent, Huntsman has a 73 percent chance of winning, Romney 60 percent, Cain 44 percent, Perry 32 percent, and Bachmann 14 percent.

If the economy grows by the unexpected amount of 4 percent GDP growth, then Huntsman has a 55 percent chance, Romney 40 percent, Cain 25 percent, Perry 17 percent, and Bachmann 5 percent.

Notice that Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul and Rick Santorum are not even considered in this model drawn up by Nate Silver.

It ultimately comes down to what the author has said many times; that Jon Huntsman, despite his poor performance in polls so far, is by far the best bet for the Republican Party against Barack Obama, BUT the Tea Party does not care for him; evangelical Christians will not like him for being a Mormon; and unless he can win New Hampshire, he will have no opportunity to move ahead, and right now it seems unlikely.

And since Romney has many of the same problems as Huntsman, as listed above, and has actually less of a chance than Huntsman among key GOP groups, it looks likely that the Republican Party will blow the chance they theoretically have to win the White House!