Sun Jul 9, 2017, 01:51 PM

eniwetok (1,629 posts)

Can Someone Become President With 24% Of The Popular Vote?

Right wingers constantly use as a defense of the EC that they don't want NYC and LA picking our presidents. It's nonsense, of course... and why should any citizen get a smaller vote just because of their choice of state residence. But no one talks much about the absurdities the EC system.

I just did a spread sheet using last year's election results by state... and found out that it possible, though highly unlikely, that under our system a president can be elected with just 24% of the popular vote. If all the small states that comprise 280 EC votes... vote for candidate X by one vote... the winner take all rules that virtually every state uses... will give candidate X ALL those 280 votes... and if you want to be picky, OK, Nebraska apportions them but they only have 5 votes... not enough to affect this exercise.

If all the remaining states vote UNANIMOUSLY for candidate Y... X can win even with 24% of the popular vote. Now, before anyone whines that this is impossible... it doesn't matter because this just illustrates the absurdity of the system which DID give Trump the presidency with 46% while HRC got 48%.

It's about time that Dems FINALLY discuss the defects in our system which also deprive the Dems control of the Senate. Why? Because Dems represent 33 million more Americans than does the GOP.

69 replies, 9863 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

69 replies	Author	Time	Post
Can Someone Become President With 24% Of The Popular Vote? (Original post)	eniwetok	Jul 2017	OP
With help from Russia and the continuing of gerrymandering it could be possible.	onecaliberal	Jul 2017	#1
this has nothing to do with Russia...	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#2
Gerrymandering and vote suppression YES. And yes it does have to do with Russia	onecaliberal	Jul 2017	#3
"election integrity" sounds like a right wing meme	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#10
If you think election integrity is a right wing meme then you're speeding trumps story.	onecaliberal	Jul 2017	#13
you didn't explain yourself.	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#39
Im Talking about all the machines the suppression the cross check. The INTEGRITY	onecaliberal	Jul 2017	#40
Sure... but remember this...	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#41
If there were NO voter suppression that would never happen. It's only happened 3 times	onecaliberal	Jul 2017	#42
it doesn't matter...	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#57
Not saying there is no bias. And the EC should absolutely vote with the winner of popular vote.	onecaliberal	Jul 2017	#58
especially since we know it's origin	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#60
They wrote all men are created equal but what they really meant are only white men	onecaliberal	Jul 2017	#61
Just curious -- how many millions of votes would this amount to? In other words,	pnwmom	Jul 2017	#4
here are the numbers... assuming I didn't screw up...	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#5
Wow! I knew it was bad but I didn't know it was this bad.	pnwmom	Jul 2017	#6
Only the popular vote eliminates these absurdities...	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#8
yes.	Chipper Chat	Jul 2017	#7
Trump job rating in Michigan as of May was 61% unfavorable only 12% positive	stevenleser	Jul 2017	#15
Back in March Trump approval level in Wisconsin was 41% and disapproval was 47%	stevenleser	Jul 2017	#16
Rick Scott will be out of office in 2020	csziggy	Jul 2017	#28
In my opinion the defect comes from	Egnever	Jul 2017	#9
who cares what was "intended"???	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#11
as for a check on the masses...	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#12
There are ways both issues can be resolved.	stevenleser	Jul 2017	#17
Sure, I support IRV... but not WITH the EC	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#31
That is what I meant.	stevenleser	Jul 2017	#34
They could win with less than that ...	surrealAmerican	Jul 2017	#14
That is not correct. You need one more than half the electoral votes to win. Otherwise...	stevenleser	Jul 2017	#18
Wouldn't the House choosing in that event ...	surrealAmerican	Jul 2017	#19
Correct, but that is not what your original post stated.	stevenleser	Jul 2017	#21
Nope... less than 270 goes to House	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#23
Thanks for that.	surrealAmerican	Jul 2017	#24
you may still be correct..	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#27
Unfortunately The EC	fallout87	Jul 2017	#20
Not in the lifetimes of anyone alive today I dont think.	stevenleser	Jul 2017	#22
GOPers aren't the problem...	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#30
I don't think your forums are representative	stevenleser	Jul 2017	#33
look up my old threads here...	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#37
That's Quite An Exaggeration	ProfessorGAC	Jul 2017	#50
The EC is just a small part of the problem	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#54
I did understand what you were saying and my response remains: it's unsupported.	stevenleser	Jul 2017	#53
Our system is virtually reformproof... which is why...	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#25
It'll happen only after a Republican candidate wins the popular vote but loses the EC vote.	NYC Liberal	Jul 2017	#46
It is actually fairly close to be effectively abolished.	Voltaire2	Jul 2017	#47
Wishful thinking	fallout87	Jul 2017	#48
Actually it makes it irrelevant.	Voltaire2	Jul 2017	#49
An attempt to reform the winner-take-all	treestar	Jul 2017	#62
intended?	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#66
A possible outcome given the rules of the game	aikoaiko	Jul 2017	#26
easy to say... impossibe to achieve	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#29
I misread you post...	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#38
If you let enough third parties in this could happen	Gothmog	Jul 2017	#32
In theory it could go down to 9%	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#36
it's theoretically possible to become president with zero votes!	unblock	Jul 2017	#35
More importantly, the Constitution doesn't require that anybody vote...	brooklynite	Jul 2017	#45
many states did just that.	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#56
In theory somebody could win the presidency with even less	mythology	Jul 2017	#43
The EC is a throwback to slavery.	Foamfollower	Jul 2017	#44
You could probably become president with 0.01% of the popular vote	Ezior	Jul 2017	#51
"which also deprive the Dems control of the Senate." - are you proposing eliminating states? n/t	PoliticAverse	Jul 2017	#52
really... that's your response?	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#55
This message was self-deleted by its author	spanone	Jul 2017	#59
Isn't it absurd enough that the losing candidate got 3 million more votes than the winner?	Tiggeroshii	Jul 2017	#63
we have a Civic Religion in the US	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#64
And for some reason, despite all that...	Tiggeroshii	Jul 2017	#65
where are the Dems?	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#68
Actually, in theory, one could win with way less than that	dsc	Jul 2017	#67
I know turnout is irrelevant...	eniwetok	Jul 2017	#69

Response to eniwetok (Original post)

Sun Jul 9, 2017, 02:00 PM

onecaliberal (29,340 posts)

Can Someone Become President With 24% Of The Popular Vote?

1. With help from Russia and the continuing of gerrymandering it could be possible.

2. this has nothing to do with Russia...

3. Gerrymandering and vote suppression YES. And yes it does have to do with Russia

10. "election integrity" sounds like a right wing meme

13. If you think election integrity is a right wing meme then you're speeding trumps story.

39. you didn't explain yourself.

40. Im Talking about all the machines the suppression the cross check. The INTEGRITY

41. Sure... but remember this...

42. If there were NO voter suppression that would never happen. It's only happened 3 times

57. it doesn't matter...

58. Not saying there is no bias. And the EC should absolutely vote with the winner of popular vote.

60. especially since we know it's origin

61. They wrote all men are created equal but what they really meant are only white men

4. Just curious -- how many millions of votes would this amount to? In other words,

5. here are the numbers... assuming I didn't screw up...

6. Wow! I knew it was bad but I didn't know it was this bad.

8. Only the popular vote eliminates these absurdities...

7. yes.

15. Trump job rating in Michigan as of May was 61% unfavorable only 12% positive

16. Back in March Trump approval level in Wisconsin was 41% and disapproval was 47%

28. Rick Scott will be out of office in 2020

9. In my opinion the defect comes from

11. who cares what was "intended"???

12. as for a check on the masses...

17. There are ways both issues can be resolved.

31. Sure, I support IRV... but not WITH the EC

34. That is what I meant.

14. They could win with less than that ...

18. That is not correct. You need one more than half the electoral votes to win. Otherwise...

19. Wouldn't the House choosing in that event ...

21. Correct, but that is not what your original post stated.

23. Nope... less than 270 goes to House

24. Thanks for that.

27. you may still be correct..

20. Unfortunately The EC

22. Not in the lifetimes of anyone alive today I dont think.

30. GOPers aren't the problem...

33. I don't think your forums are representative

37. look up my old threads here...

50. That's Quite An Exaggeration

54. The EC is just a small part of the problem

53. I did understand what you were saying and my response remains: it's unsupported.

25. Our system is virtually reformproof... which is why...

46. It'll happen only after a Republican candidate wins the popular vote but loses the EC vote.

47. It is actually fairly close to be effectively abolished.

48. Wishful thinking

49. Actually it makes it irrelevant.

62. An attempt to reform the winner-take-all

66. intended?

26. A possible outcome given the rules of the game

29. easy to say... impossibe to achieve

38. I misread you post...

32. If you let enough third parties in this could happen

36. In theory it could go down to 9%

35. it's theoretically possible to become president with zero votes!

45. More importantly, the Constitution doesn't require that anybody vote...

56. many states did just that.

43. In theory somebody could win the presidency with even less

44. The EC is a throwback to slavery.

51. You could probably become president with 0.01% of the popular vote

52. "which also deprive the Dems control of the Senate." - are you proposing eliminating states? n/t

55. really... that's your response?

63. Isn't it absurd enough that the losing candidate got 3 million more votes than the winner?

64. we have a Civic Religion in the US

65. And for some reason, despite all that...

68. where are the Dems?

67. Actually, in theory, one could win with way less than that

69. I know turnout is irrelevant...