Skip to main content

View Diary: President Obama, Mitt Romney, and the path to 270 electoral votes (261 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The 2010 election won't affect a 269 tie (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Odysseus

    When the election gets thrown to the House, each state delegation gets one vote, so California and Wyoming each get one vote (which makes perfect sense). I don't really have the energy to dig through the numbers, but I'd wager that even the recent post-2008 Democratic House didn't control a majority of the congressional delegations, because so many small states trend Republican.

    I think there might also be a faithless elector in the event of a 269-269 tie (which would prevent it from going to the House) -- who wouldn't want to play kingmaker in that scenario?

    •  2009 House would have gone Democratic (0+ / 0-)

      I did go back and look at the numbers. The 2009 House had 31 state slates controlled by Democrats, 17 by Republicans, and 2 split. I was surprised at how many states I expected to be Republican-controlled weren't: MS, NC, ND, SD, TN.

      •  Pretty amazing (0+ / 0-)

        It's slow at work so I checked to see how the 112th Congress would vote -- it's a bloodbath, D: 15, R: 33, and 2 split.

        Of course, it would actually be the incoming 113th Congress voting for president.  There are currently 7 state delegations whose party affiliation would turn D if we picked up one seat (AK, CO, MO, ND, SD, UT, WV, WY).  Add in the two split delegations -- NJ is only split because of the vacant safe-D seat -- and it becomes a 50/50 split!

        None of this takes the redistricting/reapportionment into account, and there's no way Obama only manages a 269-269 tie against Romney while the Democrats pick up seats all over the place, but it's pretty fascinating to think about what would happen in this scenario (some of those at-large congressmen would suddenly become very popular).

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site