If Sarah Palin is McCain's Harriet Miers, Can She Be Replaced by McCain?

A quick Google search shows that a number of commentators (including Andrew Sullivan and Dahlia Lithwick) have already compared presumptive Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin to withdrawn Bush Supreme Court appointee Harriet Miers.

To be sure, there are parallels, including criticism of both by David Frum (here and here) and Ramesh Ponnuru (here and here). But there's a big political difference too: Miers infuriated the conservative Republican base, while Palin, if she appeals to any constituency in the party, appeals most to conservatives.

But suppose that because of the "heartbeat away" concerns, there is an outcry to replace Palin on the ticket. Could Sen McCain do so if he wanted to? Of course, if it happens before the convention vote, there would be no issue. But even after the convention, as far as the Republican rules go, the power to replace is right in the hands of the RNC, which surely would bow to a McCain replacement decision. Rule 9 provides:

Filling Vacancies in Nominations

(a) The Republican National Committee is hereby authorized and empowered to fill any and all vacancies which may occur by reason of death, declination, or otherwise of the Republican candidate for President of the United States or the Republican candidate for Vice President of the United States, as nominated by the national convention, or the Republican National Committee may reconvene the national convention for the purpose of filling any such vacancies.

(b) In voting under this rule, the Republican National Committee members representing any state shall be entitled to cast the same number of votes as said state was entitled to cast at the national convention.

(c) In the event that the members of the Republican National Committee from any state shall not be in agreement in the casting of votes hereunder, the votes of such state shall be divided equally, including fractional votes among the members of the Republican National Committee present or voting by proxy.

(d) No candidate shall be chosen to fill any such vacancy except upon receiving a majority of the votes entitled to be cast in the election.

Depending upon when such a replacement would occur, there could be state law issues. In Texas, for example (which has other problems right now with Democratic and Republican presidential candidate names on the ballot), any withdrawal of a candidate in fewer than 74 days before the election (we are currently 67 days before the election) results in the withdrawn candidate's name remaining on the ballot.

Comments

[esday]

McCain chose a running mate- not for the good of his country- but for political gain. Palin would be a disaster in foreign policy. Images of Bush running through my head... he had no idea, either, except maybe he wanted some revenge for daddy. Remember when McCain accused Obama of opposing the war for political gain? Well, I am questioning McCain's patriotism, now! What a stupid choice for all of us, and our children. I deeply resent that McCain has potentially dealt us another naive and ignorant executive. It is actually very likely that she would have to replace him. McCain = poor judgment; poor patriot.

[AlgerHiss]

What foreign policy experience did John Edwards have when John Kerry selected him to be VP? Or Al Gore when Bill Clinton chose him in 1992?

Cokie Roberts (ABC): "No governors have foreign policy experience­."

[darker]

Hey, "incompetence and back-room cronyism" is WHAT REPUBLICANS ARE.
And Palin is a Republican. Business as usual!

[Old time Dem]

Another distraction when the American people need solutions.

The choices this year are Obama and Barr - and the GOP has no one to blame but itself.

I'm voting Barr this year, but know Obama/Biden is a far better choice than McCain/Palin.

[MsLiz]

Barr? Barr???!!!

[SamThornton]

The more that comes to light about Gov. Palin, the more Sen. McCain's choice of a running mate appears to be a major blunder on the scale of McGovern's pick of Thomas Eagleton, probably worse. At least Eagleton could argue he had some credible experience.

The question for the McCain camp at this point is would killing the Palin nomination cause them less damage than sticking with the choice.

Citing Palin's "executive experience" as a mayor is a dangerous ploy. During nearly all of her term, her local newspaper constantly ran editorials excoriating her incompetence and back-room cronyism. There is plenty of ammunition there to seriously damage her candidacy.

This looks like it might develop into a major campaign issue, another instance of McCain shooting from the hip and hitting himself in the foot.

[AlgerHiss]

> Citing Palin's "executive experience" as a mayor is a dangerous ploy.

It's not dangerous but it's lame. Republicans don't know how to debate. All they need to do is look at history (which even liberals aren't doing), and look at the previous VP candidates.

Even so, as bad as Republicans are at defending Palin, Democrats are equally bad at defending Obama on experience.

[Boikin]

You set up a "Harriet Miers" straw man and then knock it down. Intellectually lazy work.