Why We Should Never Ever Abolish The Electoral College

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.

US Government for Kids Electoral College Ducksters

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College is widely regarded as an anachronism, a nondemocratic method of selecting a president that ought to be superseded by declaring the candidate who receives the most popular votes the winner.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.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked Required fields are marked *