11-09-2016, 10:34 PM
(11-09-2016, 10:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Because every vote does count.
The problem with going strictly by the popular is about 4 states would determine every election. For instance, taking only NY and California, Hills got approximately 4 million more votes that Trump. That is more than total voters in 44 states.
It is still slightly that way with the EC, but not as drastic. For instance with the states of NY and CA Clinton earned 84 electoral votes. Trump earned 67 in TX and FL, but only scored less than 1 million in the popular.
In the EC system, not every vote counts. A conservative living in California or a liberal in Mississippi cast pointless votes for POTUS. Relying on the popular vote would require at least the person with the most votes to win, but someone could win the EC race with only 22% of the popular vote. It would take winning the plurality of the votes in 8 states, whereas the minimum states needed to win based on popular with ranked voting would be 9, and that is with winning 100% of the popular vote (assuming the percentage of voters in a state to the federal number is roughly the same as population percentages).
Edit: My math was wrong, not sure what I did. 11 states minimum for EC. Still allows for winning the EC with only 22% of the popular vote.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
