Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Electoral College 2000 - Ahead of the Curve -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (3693)	11/28/2000 10:30:00 AM
From: chomolungma	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6710

You're right. So if Gore gets to break the tie, and the vote broke along party lines, Lieberman would get it. I assume it would be the new Senate and Gore would not be VP then. It would be a 50-50 tie and no VP to cast a tiebreaker. Right?

To: Ilaine who wrote (3693)	11/28/2000 11:27:41 AM
From: CYBERKEN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6710

<<So if Gore gets to break the tie, and the vote broke along party lines, Lieberman would get it.>> Interesting enough, but then add: The appointment of Lieberman as VP would give the Senate to the Republicans. So Lieberman would immediately resign the VP job and retain his Senate seat, leaving VP open, and a tied Senate. Bush would then appoint a new VP-subject to approval by the tied Senate. That leaves the choice of leaving the Vice Presidency open for 2 years until a new Senate is seated, or finding "common ground" on a VP candidate (VERY unlikely). So my question is: Who is president of the Senate when there is no sitting VP? Whomever that is would determine who the new VP is...