2004 User Predictions - Discussion

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

It's weird how such a predictable event as Edwards getting the VP nomination has made such a difference in the collective opinion here in under a day.  Ohio has swung back to being seen as a Kerry tossup and the Median projection has gone from 280-258 Kerry-Bush to 284-254 Kerry-Bush.  Granted, I changed my own prediction, but that was because my prediction was based upon a generic VP.  A lot of people had said they were basing theirs on Edwards as VP, so they shouldn't have had any reason to change their prediction today.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Actually, for the VP its just the Senators that matter.  Since each state has 2 senators, the writers of the 12th Amendment probably fighure that if they had them vote by delegation there would be too much chance of a tied delegations not casting a vote so instead the requirement is a "majority of the whole Number" which means that 51 Senators have to agree omn who the VP should be.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The twelfth amendment clearly sets a different standard for the quorom required for when the Senate votes for the Vice President, so it is reasonable that the explict wirding given there about needing "a majority of the whole Number" means exactly what it says, namely that 51 Senators would be required.  Even a 50-49 vote would be insufficient in my opinion as 50 is not a majority of 100.  However since the Senate has never elected a Vice President, there is no precedent to call upon in this case.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Agreed.  There is no way that Bush would win Alabama and lose Mississippi.  Put Mississippi into the Bush column and that map would be merely very extremely improbable.