You are correct. If it did happen that Bloomberg won the race with fewer than 299 electoral votes (270 to win plus NY 29), there would likely be no winner of the VP race. If that happened, it would go to the Senate. If a democrat wins POTUS, you can bet that they would pick up some seats in the senate. They have 47 right now. They don't necessarily need 51 seats. They can count on Romney for sure and maybe Collins of Maine to vote Hillary in.RSX11 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:48 pmNot strictly correct, actually. The law says that the electors from their home state can't vote for both of them. So NY's electors in the electrical (heh heh) college could cast 29 votes for Bloomberg as President, but would have to cast 29 votes for someone besides Hilary else as VP. There's no law against them both winning the election, if Hilary gets enough votes from the other states. This would only make a difference in a very close election.Mike Bloomberg and Hillary Clinton could not run on the same ticket, as they are from the same State and the Constitution (remember that?) prevents it. Two residents of the same State cannot be elected by the Electors as President and Vice-President. They have both missed the deadline to change residency. If they were to be on the same ticket, I believe they’d have to sacrifice the electoral vote from NY. That’d obviously be a nonstarter for a Dem win.
Of course, if Bloomberg won 299 or more electoral votes, Hillary could win VP outright without the NY electoral votes. Obama won 365 electoral votes in 2008 and 332 electoral votes in 2012. Trump won 306 electoral votes, although only 304 were cast for him. The 299 threshold does not seem too difficult to achieve.
Next we will discuss faithless electors and how they could make a royal mess of things.