Let mayhem begin

For politicos out there, tonight is going to be a wild ride. A 50-50 race nationwide and ferocious battle in key states with no clear champion has left many Americans thirsting for closure. However, the end victory of either candidate could prove quite messy considering the Constitutional possibilities. \nWe live in a Constitutional republic, meaning that the framers wanted to stop "tyrannical majorities" from seizing power and imposing their will upon the populace. The framers constructed a complex, detailed and fascinating Constitution that proved itself eminently workable in the 2000 election, however unpopular. Yet, this year, America finds itself separated by a gulf of division where coastal states and large cities lean strongly toward Kerry while rural areas back Bush. The fight, therefore, has been in a smattering of swing states with suburban populations and undecided voters who will determine the outcome. Or will they?\nIf another swing state has a repeat of a Floridian voter debacle, the state legislatures have the power to determine to whom the electoral votes shall be awarded. In 2000, Florida's state legislature, controlled by the Republicans, pushed to immediately award Bush their electoral votes. My main point: Your state legislators have immense political power. Make sure you vote for them concurrently with your presidential vote ... or else.\nIn 2000, Al Gore conceded the election (which he then retracted) before Florida's voting fiasco was resolved, giving the nation a feeling of inevitable doom for Gore's candidacy. But in 2004, both parties have countless millions invested in this election; don't expect any quick concession speeches. Be ready for both candidates to declare victory, days of legal pyrotechnics, interminable recounts and talking heads on television eating crow.\nHow about a president from Illinois? If the legal battles ensue past Inauguration Day: "Heeeeeeeere's Denny Hastert, your new president." Yes, Dennis Hastert, the current speaker of the House from Illinois, will be forced to resign his House seat and assume the presidency until a clear winner emerges. Then, upon the cessation of legal battles, ole' Denny will have to resign the presidency and return to Illinois and start anew in 2006. Isn't democracy grand? \nWhat about an 1876 finish? Republican Rutherford B. Hayes was opposing New York Samuel B. Tilden. The popular vote was 4,300,000 for Tilden to 4,036,000 for Hayes. Hayes' election depended upon contested electoral votes in Louisiana, South Carolina and Florida. If all the disputed electoral votes went to Hayes, he would win; a single one would elect Tilden. \nMonths of uncertainty passed until January 1877, whereupon Congress established an Electoral Commission to decide the dispute. Comprised of eight Republicans and seven Democrats, they voted on strict party lines. Hayes won, and the final electoral vote stood at 185 Hayes to 184 Tilden. It is generally agreed by historians that two of the three disputed states were won by Tilden, even though the Electoral Commission awarded all the disputed states to "Rutherfraud" B. Hayes.\nHow about a repeat of 2000 in reverse? According to Sunday's USA Today poll, Kerry is leading in several swing states. What if Kerry wins Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania -- the three big 'uns -- but then loses the popular vote to Bush? This is pretty messy, but doable, considering 2000. How about taking it to the House? If no candidate gets a clear majority, the House determines the election. Each state will receive one vote, effectively killing Kerry's presidential ambitions. \nWant to hear the Warnke prediction? People vote their wallet and the economy sucks. There will be record voter turnout, and this will sound the death knell for George W. Bush. People are pissed off, unemployed and tired of the irresponsibility and fiscal insanity of this President. The winds of change are blowing, but I would definitely watch the races in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio and, of course, Florida.