From our M.C. Escher desk
Friday’s New York Times ran the following:
A correction in this space on Thursday for a Political Memo article about the likelihood that the nomination of Hillary Rodham Clinton for president would block the paths for other women running for the White House, and for those who would like to be vice president, overstated the limitations the Constitution places on two candidates from the same state running on the same presidential ticket. The inhabitant clause of the Twelfth Amendment disqualifies the electors from that state from voting for both offices; the provision does not explicitly prohibit the vice-presidential candidate from being from the same state as the president.
The original correction:
Correction: April 24, 2014
Because of an editing error, an article on Wednesday about the likelihood that the nomination of Hillary Rodham Clinton for president would block the paths for other women running for the White House, and for those who would like to be vice president, referred incompletely to the possibility that Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand might be chosen as a running mate. Aside from the debate over a two-woman ticket, Ms. Gillibrand and Mrs. Clinton are both from New York, and the Constitution effectively prohibits the election of a president and a vice president who are from the same state. In addition, the article misstated the significance of having two women running on a presidential ticket. It would be the first such ticket for a major party, not the first time two women have run together. (Jill Stein and Cheri Honkala were running mates on the Green Party ticket in 2012.)
So, to recap:
New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-Caboose) actually could be Hillary Clinton’s running mate in the 2016 presidential bakeoff.
But won’t be.
See you in two years.
I’d vote that ticket.