However, there is a clause in the 12th stating that electors cannot vote for more than one candidate from their own state.....assuming the electors poll for PDJT, the Senate could theoretically determine the VP. Such a situation would obviously require another "insurrection".....<sarc>.
quora.com
it was changed by the Twelfth Amendment in 1804. However, a clause in Article II of the Constitution is still in effect:
The electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves.
So in theory, if you had a President and a VP from the same state, the electors from that state could not vote for both the President and the Vice President. In 2000, Bush and Cheney had both been Texas residents, and the Bush/Cheney ticket narrowly won with 271 electoral votes. Had both of them declared Texas as their home states, the 32 Texas electors could not have voted for both Bush and for Cheney. They presumably would have all voted for Bush, making him President—but Cheney would have only had 239 electoral votes and would not have been elected Vice President. Had that happened, the choice of VP would have gone to the Senate—the last time that happened was 1837—and then things would get interesting. That scenario never happened, because Cheney declared Wyoming to be his home state. And in some elections, it would not matter; Ronald Reagan in 1984 won 525 electoral votes to Walter Mondale’s 13, so in the end Reagan could theoretically have had a Californian as his running mate and it wouldn’t have changed the result, since the VP would have won even without California’s 47 electoral votes. But to head off problems, it’s wisest for a party to pick candidates from different states. (Source: Can the president and the vice president be from the same state?) |
