Kind of jarring to admit that I'd rather have a dictator (Vetinari) than either democratically-nominated candidate. I guess it's because I know Vetinari would be completely devoted to the well-being of the country, while the other candidates would only be loyal to their own inner circles.
This was one of my favourite polls of yours, btw. I *really* wanted to answer "Obama/Palin" for at least one of the "serious" races (your govenrment would generally devolve into a vaudeville comedy team act! Obama, of course, playing the straight man.) but I'm too much of an Obama supporter to say that.
And, as to the "fictitious" race, every single option (except the final one) I was seriously considering, but my love of the Marx Brothers won out.
The curious thing is, with the Electoral College setup as outlined in the 12th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, it is just possible to have that result. It would need to be an absolute Electoral tie with nobody in the EC shifting to undo the balance and elect a President or Vice President. Then the decision(s) would go to the congress. The House of Representatives would then decide on the President with a one-state one-vote system - with a majority of Democrats the outcome would most likely be a President Obama. The Vice President would be selected by the Senate, which could just result in a Vice President Palin.
This is an extremely improbable, but not an impossible, thing. There is a further provision, that if even that backup fails and the Congress deadlocks on the Presidency beyond inauguration day, the Vice President (as elected) would act as President. And if that seizes up? Then the 20th Amendment kicks in and the Congress gets to select "who shall then act as President." And that would really stir things up.
According to Wikipedia, it lists John Adams and Abraham Lincoln as having Veeps of different parties, but they served so long ago that the party system as we know it was a whole different animal. Yes, you pointed out that it can be done, but also highly unlikely. Polls seem to indicate that this election will be "close", but apparently not as close as 2000 or 2004, neither of which came to the situation you describe.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2008 01:22 (UTC)no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2008 03:05 (UTC)no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2008 03:06 (UTC)no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2008 12:26 (UTC)no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2008 13:46 (UTC)no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2008 21:27 (UTC)(had to be said)
no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2008 16:55 (UTC)I would like to see Palin and Cheney in a deathmatch with hunting rifles and dawgs at 4000 paces. Elderly politicians and elderly lawyers optional.
no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2008 17:39 (UTC)And you might want to consider that Hillary could be considered an elderly lawyer and politician.
no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2008 21:28 (UTC)Damn, you just spoiled all the enjoyment I got out of your Presidential race!
Next you'll be telling me McCain isn't some kind of cyborg ...
no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2008 21:36 (UTC)And, as to the "fictitious" race, every single option (except the final one) I was seriously considering, but my love of the Marx Brothers won out.
Firefly/Roland in '08!
no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2008 22:28 (UTC)This is an extremely improbable, but not an impossible, thing. There is a further provision, that if even that backup fails and the Congress deadlocks on the Presidency beyond inauguration day, the Vice President (as elected) would act as President. And if that seizes up? Then the 20th Amendment kicks in and the Congress gets to select "who shall then act as President." And that would really stir things up.
no subject
Date: 24 Oct 2008 01:13 (UTC)