President Hillary Clinton? President Donald Trump? The choice might not be so simple. There is still a path albeit an implausible and narrow one for an alternative. If Clinton and Trump were to tie in the Electoral College and deadlock in the House of Representatives, the U. S. Senate would then choose between Vice Presidential nominees Tim Kaine and Mike Pence. Here s how this unlikely but still possible constitutional scenario would play out.
Sen Barbara Boxer to introduce bill to end Electoral College
Based on an 66-state battleground, 775 to Win, though not all are plausible. (It s pretty unlikely that Clinton would win North Carolina while losing Virginia, for example. )That figure goes up to 676 possibilities if you include the fact that Maine and Nebraska split their electoral votes by congressional district, unlike the rest of the states, and that each party could plausibly pick off one electoral vote in an otherwise reliably partisan state. The number of mathematically possible ties varies depending on which states you consider to be tossups. Using RealClearPolitics including just one electoral vote from Maine there are only 76 possible ties, according to TIME s calculations. (It may seem strange that the number goes down with more battleground states, but such is the caprice of electoral math. ) Should the United States Use the Electoral College in Presidential Elections? Chat with us in Facebook Messenger. Find out what s happening in the world as it unfolds. Washington (CNN) Retiring Democratic Sen. The presidency is the only office where you can get more votes still lose. It s time to end the Electoral College. And so ends another year in American politics. Thanks for reading, and hope to have you around for the rest of what promises to be an exciting year!
(Z)Your donation is greatly appreciated. It will buy ads to publicize the site. The Electoral College is widely regarded as an anachronism, a nondemocratic method of selecting a president that ought to be superseded by declaring the candidate who receives the most popular votes the winner. The advocates of this position are correct in arguing that the Electoral College method is not democratic in a modern sense. The Constitution provides that Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress. And it is the electors who elect the president, not the people. When you vote for a presidential candidate you re actually voting for a slate of electors. But each party selects a slate of electors trusted to vote for the party s nominee (and that trust is rarely betrayed). Because virtually all states award all their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote in the state, and because the Electoral College weights the less populous states more heavily along the lines of the Senate (two Senators and two Electoral College votes for every state, and then more electoral votes added for each state based on population), it is entirely possible that the winner of the electoral vote will not win the national popular vote. Yet that has happened very rarely. It happened in 7555, when Gore had more popular votes than Bush yet fewer electoral votes, but that was the first time since 6888. There are five reasons for retaining the Electoral College despite its lack of democratic pedigree all are practical reasons, not liberal or conservative reasons. A dispute over the outcome of an Electoral College vote is possible it happened in 7555 but it s less likely than a dispute over the popular vote. The reason is that the winning candidate s share of the Electoral College invariably exceeds his share of the popular vote. In last week s election, for example, Obama received 66. 7 percent of the electoral vote compared to only 56.
US Government for Kids Electoral College Ducksters
8 percent of the popular votes cast for him and Romney. (I ignore the scattering of votes not counted for either candidate. ) Because almost all states award electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis, even a very slight plurality in a state creates a landslide electoral-vote victory in that state. A tie in the nationwide electoral vote is possible because the total number of votes 588 is an even number, but it is highly unlikely. The Electoral College requires a presidential candidate to have transregional appeal. No region (South, Northeast, etc. ) has enough electoral votes to elect a president. So a solid regional favorite, such as Romney was in the South, has no incentive to campaign heavily in those states, for he gains no electoral votes by increasing his plurality in states that he knows he will win. This is a desirable result because a candidate with only regional appeal is unlikely to be a successful president. The residents of the other regions are likely to feel disfranchised to feel that their votes do not count, that the new president will have no regard for their interests, that he really isn t their president. My post earlier in the week ( ) reminded me of a passage from (written by Alexander Hamilton) that I had been intending to write about. Specifically I would draw attention to the following excerpts that describe how Hamilton thought that the electoral college would function (emphases mine): It was desirable that the sense of the people should operate in the choice of the person to whom so important a trust was to be confided. This end will be answered by committing the right of making it, not to any preestablished body, but to men chosen by the people for the special purpose, and at the particular conjuncture. It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations. The choice of several, to form an intermediate body of electors, will be much less apt to convulse the community with any extraordinary or violent movements, than the choice of one who was himself to be the final object of the public wishes.
And as the electors, chosen in each State, are to assemble and vote in the State in which they are chosen, this detached and divided situation will expose them much less to heats and ferments, which might be communicated from them to the people, than if they were all to be convened at one time, in one place. However, the Electoral College is written into the US Constitution. There’s no way to get rid of it without an amendment. And since doing away with the College would weaken the voice of smaller states, it’s unlikely such an amendment would ever pass. For better or worse, this is the system we’ve got. You are using an outdated browser. Please to improve your experience. Hillary Clinton made an argument for dissolving the Electoral College in an interview with CNN s Anderson Cooper on Wednesday night. I think it needs to be eliminated. I d like to see us move beyond it, yes, Clinton said. Clinton lost the Electoral College to Donald Trump, who pulled in 856 votes to Clinton s 786 last November. The Electoral College has 588 members who select the US president based on the popular vote in every state, as opposed to the national popular-vote tally, which is why a candidate who loses the popular vote can still win an election. (Credit: )You are free to share this article under the Attribution 9. 5 International license. Otherwise, The great majority of American voters exercise no real political voice in the outcome of presidential elections, says Doug McAdam, professor of sociology at Stanford University. Under the United States Constitution, the Electoral College determines who is the president, based on vote totals in each state.
Each state s number of electors is equal to its number of members of Congress (representatives plus senators). Washington, DC, also has three electors, so the total number of Electoral College members is 588.