By now you've read Part I in our explanation of how a Romney/Kasich ticket could disrupt an electoral majority in November, preventing either Trump or Hillary from being elected and moving on to the "run-off" in the House of Representatives. By way of reminder, the 12th Amendment describes what this process entails for selecting who will be President:

...if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice.

The second feat of winning the Presidential election in the House of Representatives is also a challenging, unpredictable feat for a Romney/Kasich team, assuming feat #1 is successful—let's now break down the math on what winning in the House could look like:

The House is currently controlled by the Republicans, with 246 seats to the 188 of Democrats (434 total). Let's just assume, worst case, that every sitting Democrat will vote for Hillary. This would mean that the Romney/Kasich ticket would need to convince 218 of the total 246 Republican Representatives to abandon the idea of Donald Trump leading their Grand Old Party and aligning with an independent or new political party (218/434=50.2%)—but that is only if EVERY member of the House is present for the vote. The 12th Amendment is clear that only two-thirds of members must be present for a 'quorum' to exist. This is where Romney's alliance with Speaker Paul Ryan becomes critical, because Speaker Ryan ultimately wields the power to decide when a vote is taken. 
Conceivably, in addition to being the head Romney/Kasich cheerleader and promoting the idea of an independent vote among House members, Speaker Ryan can time the vote to occur when conditions are optimal for a Romney victory. BEST CASE scenario, this would occur when exactly 144 Democrats (or Trump-voting Republicans) are absent (290/434 = 66.8% = Quorom!) Now, Romney needs only 146 votes out of the 290 present to achieve a majority among the Quorom. That's only 59% of the Republican House members and only 33% of The total House. Probably not feasible for a wild card third party "no-name" independent who House members don't know and/or trust—probably not even feasible for John Kasich himself, who by his own accounts was relatively unknown prior to this race. But for Mitt Romney, two-time presidential contender, former Massachusetts Governor and Republican party veteran, to be chosen over Trump by 59% of House Republicans, we think is well within the realm of possibility—especially given the fact that to date Trump has only received an endorsement from a whopping 11 current members of the House.  (For reference, by the end of the 2012 primaries Mitt Romney had received endorsement of 85 sitting members of the House).

Now, here's where the process gets stickier—Vice-President selection. The 12th Amendment describes this process as well:

The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

That's right—only the top TWO go into the Vice Presidential run-off in the Senate. Which means that in a Romney/Kasich scenario, chances are Kasich doesn't make it to the final election in the Senate-- they will end up choosing between Hillary's running mate and Trump's. And since the Senate is currently Controlled by Democrats, we can assume that Hillary's running mate would inevitably end up VP in this scenario. So, yes, at the end of this whole scenario we could likely end up with a Republican/Independent President and a Democratic Vice President—something that hasn't happened since 1865 with Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson. But this would probably do our Country some good anyway, to see a Republican/Independent President and a Democrat VP cooperate. Congress can't seem to figure that out themselves.

A Romney/Kasich duo has what it takes to pose a plausible (even if it's a long shot) 3rd party run for the White House—not necessarily because of their combined synergy, but because each one brings a specific, calculated key to the equation. Kasich doesn't have the clout among House Republicans to potentially swing a majority vote against the 'party nominee' like Romney does, yet Romney can't get to the final run-off without the critical help of Kasich to take Ohio's 18 electoral votes. So, America needs John Kasich to agree to do the most American thing possible: sacrifice his own interests to preserve the future of the Nation. John Kasich is the Bing Bong to Mitt Romney's Joy (Inside Out spoiler alert!)—Together they get the wagon going fast enough, and just in time Kasich must jump out and let Mitt ride it all the way to the top.


 (C) Disney•Pixar. All Rights Reserved.

The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. (emphasis added)    

 We're talking about electoral college votes here, not popular vote.  In other words, if no one candidate receives a majority of electoral college votes (which is 270) on November 8th, then the top THREE electoral candidates go into what is essentially a run-off in the House of Representatives.  What this means is that a 3rd party candidate doesn't need to WIN the general election--that candidate simply needs to disrupt the general election enough to prevent a majority of electoral votes for the other two candidates.  Let's divide this into two separate ideas: First is disrupting the electoral college majority, and second is going on and winning a majority vote in the House of Representatives.  This post will focus on the first point, and we'll follow up with another post on the second.

In order to accomplish the first feat of preventing a majority of electoral votes a dark horse, third party candidate would need to be a strong enough candidate, with a suitable Vice Presidential candidate, to win enough states' electoral college votes to prevent either Trump or Hillary from obtaining 270 electoral votes.  As it is, current polling projections expect it to be a close race in November.  That means that a 3rd party needs only win roughly 30 electoral votes--and they need to pull states almost equally away from Trump and Hillary. That doesn't mean it will be easy-- the last time a 3rd party took more than 30 electoral votes was George Wallace with the American Independent Party in 1968.  Who is the strongest, best-suited presidential duo to accomplish this?  Mitt Romney and John Kasich, President and Vice President.

Mathematically, this is quite doable for a Romney/Kasich ticket.   Obviously, there are thousands of mathematically possible combinations that lead to a disrupted electoral college—we will simply present one of the more plausible cases:  During the primary season Kasich proved that he had overwhelming support in Ohio despite being a long-shot candidate.  He would help the Romney/Kasich ticket take battleground Ohio, which alone is 18 electoral votes.  Ohio went for Obama in 2012, so let's assume those are votes lost for the Democratic ticket.  It is also safe to assume Romney/Kasich would easily win Utah, Idaho, and probably Wyoming based on the overwhelming Republican, Latter-Day Saint population paired with Trump's abysmal performance in those states in the Primaries-- that's an additional 13 electoral votes.  Already at 31 votes, Romney/Kasich ticket is within the realm of disrupting an electoral college majority.  Other viable states for winning a plurality of votes based on Primary outcomes are District of Columbia (3), Kansas (6), Oklahoma (7), Iowa (6), and possibly even Texas (a whopping 38). And let's not forget that Maine and Nebraska split electoral college votes (i.e. not winner-takes-all).  They may pick up a small handful of votes from those states too. Romney/Kasich should have an easier time drawing red states away from Trump; so as long as Florida (29) and a couple other swing states don't ALL swing Democrat, that should do it.

Of course, there is the complication of vote-splitting, which is hard to predict—but so is the appeal of strong, sane, and rational 3rd party candidates when both major party candidates are so disliked. We know that many right-leaning states would would go 3rd party given the chance. The real question is whether some of the left-leaners are really that Ready for Hillary. Could more blue and swing states be won-over than red states compromised by a split? A Romney/Kasich duo, loosed from the shackles of the GOP, would be evaluated based on their own merits, principles, and policies rather than simply their association with the Republican Party at large and its often unpopular reputation—becoming increasingly more palatable to even the bluest of states as we draw nearer to November.  Would a strong, viable 3rd party ticket like Romney/Kasich embolden Bernie Sanders to make a run himself and further dilute the electoral votes?

There remains a lot of uncertainty about this approach, but you can bet that it is being discussed and calculated.  Think about it—Why has Mitt Romney not endorsed any candidate this election cycle?  Why did Kasich unexpectedly drop out of the primaries after vowing to continue until the Republican Convention?  Why is Speaker of the House Paul Ryan so reluctant to support Trump?  Why are so many high-profile Republicans, including past Presidents, not attending the Republican Convention?  The foundation is being laid for the emergence of a new party, and ultimately the demise of the GOP as we know it.  And it's not enough for a new party to simply emerge and draw popular votes (see: Independant (Ross Perot) in 1992, Green Party in 2000, etc.).  The new party (or reformed Republican party) must have enough clout among the prevailing Republican voters to draw a substantial number of electoral votes AND a significant majority of Republican House members with it.  More to come on that topic in Part II...