The standard belief has been that Barack Obama has 237 electoral votes, and Mitt Romney has 191 electoral votes.
But now, two states have been “awarded”, meaning it is felt that each candidate has gained one of them–Nevada with six electoral votes for Obama, and North Carolina with 15 electoral votes for Romney.
So one can now say that the electoral vote total is 243 for Obama and 206 for Romney, with seven states still in play.
But, this author feels it is closer than that to 270 electoral votes for Obama.
Wisconsin seems certain for Obama, and New Hampshire also seems likely, so if they are counted, with 10 and 4 electoral votes, respectively, Obama would have 257 electoral votes, only 13 short of the 270 needed to win the Presidency!
So the remaining battlegrounds are Florida, Virginia, Ohio, Iowa, and Colorado, and even Iowa with six electoral votes seems likely Obama territory, so imagine adding Iowa, and we have 263 electoral votes, seven short of the number needed!
Every indication is that, despite supposedly close polls in percentage of popular votes, the tide is clearly in Obama’s camp, and don’t be surprised if he wins ALL of the remaining states—Ohio, Colorado, Virginia and Florida, in that order of probability!
Here’s a graphic view of potential scenarios:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/2012/10/24/bgcom-electoral/tjMBmWtk92HjkzucIZhOmJ/story.html
Nice companion article explaining the Electoral College and the possibility that the overall popular vote winner may lose the election:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2012/10/23/with-election-close-prospect-rises-that-electoral-college-winner-won-popular-vote-winner/nKvUAubKM1kcb6ewxshSzO/story.html
Professor, can you elaborate your thoughts on whether you think the Electoral College is outdated/unfair. I’ve been reading posts on history discussion boards from both liberal leaning and conservative leaning postings saying that the electoral college is the reason that a two party system is perpetual and blocks out viable independent voices. Your thoughts?
Thanks for the graph, Paul.
The Electoral College is indeed outdated and unfair, as it has failed four times to elect the popular vote winner–Jackson in 1824, Tilden in 1876, Cleveland in 1888, and Gore in 2000.
The electoral college does, indeed, sustain, the two party system and prevents third parties from winning, with the best performance ever by a third party being the Progressive Party of Theodore Roosevelt in 1912, which won 27.5 percent of the popular vote, six states, and 88 electoral votes, and ended up second, ahead of Republican President William Howard Taft. It was, also, the only truly “national” third party, winning states in all sections of the country except the South.
The problem is that to get rid of the Electoral College would require a constitutional amendment, which would mean a two thirds vote of both houses of Congress and majority support in the legislatures of 38 states out of 50, and that is not going to happen.
The one virtue of the Electoral College is that it prevents so called “extremists” of the Left or the Right from being able to win the Presidency.
Basically, the two major parties are seen as within the mainstream, although one could argue that the present Republican Party is outside the mainstream, but assuming that is a temporary situation, the Electoral College promotes moderation, so that no matter who is elected, we only see a slight tip to the left or the right when we elect a new President.
We had this discussion in my social problems course Monday. Personally I believe it serves as a bit of a safeguard by preventing complete loons from winning because they have charisma, after all Hitler had Charisma too. On the other hand it is clearly not ineffective as a system just outdated like you said. The way it’s set up we don’t really have a national election so from the view point of having 50 State elections it is actually completely fair as the person who has the majority vote wins in that state. My issue if they ever tried to get rid of it is that there needs to be a reasonable alternative to the Electoral College before it would even be more than a pipe dream for it to be removed.
I think while it probably doesn’t make much difference there is a flipside to the Electoral College debate. If the election was decided purely on the popular vote then a candidate would be extremely tempted to just go around saying any old thing knowing once he is in it won’t matter. You could argue they do that anyway though lol I think with the electoral college you need more strategy to win the white house and it becomes more difficult and in a way it serves as a sort of test for potential candidates because if they can’t handle an election I don’t want them anywhere near the oval office.
I really hope Florida doesn’t go to Romney, it would make me ashamed to live in this state lol Btw Professor would you happen to know when early voting starts, I can’t remember exactly but I thought it was this week wasn’t it?
In Florida, early voting is 7 AM to 7 PM starting Saturday, October 27 for seven straight days through Friday, November 2. There is no voting on Saturday, Sunday or Monday before the Tuesday election, due to the Republican legislature and Governor Rick Scott. The voting takes place at public libraries in your area, and you must have a voter registration card signed, and your drivers or other photo ID with a signature as well.
What you brought up, Ali, is true, about a charismatic leader who could overwhelm public opinion but be dangerous, as in France when no one in 2002 won the first round of voting, requiring 50 percent, so President Chirac had to run against a runner up with 18 percent who was supportive of Adolf Hitler’s views, even though French, and wanted to deport all Jews and Muslims from France! Chirac had had 48 percent and Jean Marie La Pen had 18 percent. Thank goodness in the runoff election, Chirac won 81 percent and Le Pen won 19 percent. But that made me realize that direct popular vote could have 10 people on the ballot, and the runner up could be a left wing or right wing extremist (more likely right wing), and that would be very scary, to say the least. So maybe best to leave the Electoral College as it is, because, after all, it has worked out all but four times, a percentage of about 92 percent of the time. That is not all that terrible, is it?
Thanks Professor, I just missed being old enough to register before the 08 election by a month or so, this will be my first time voting. My younger brother and sister are also old enough to vote now so will be going together. We are also brining my grandmother who is in a wheelchair and my mom and my Aunt who needs help filling out the ballot due to being learning disabled. I don’t suppose the crowds for early voting will be entirely that much less than the regular day but the fewer amounts of people the easier it will be to help my grandma and aunt and my little sister and brother vote. My little sister also has learning disabilities so it should be quite the adventure making sure they all get to vote correctly lol.
So true professor! I agree it’s not that bad a track record except the whole Gore not winning thing screwed us up big time at least in my opinion. This time around if Romney happens to win the popular vote but not the electoral votes I could live with that as it would almost make up for Bush lol
It would be payback for Bush LOL BUT then the Republicans would say Obama is not a true winner, that he is illegitimate as President, but what else is new? They already say that!
Yeah I mean they won’t even admit when their boy loses a debate. You will remember that even Democrats admitted that Obama did not win that first debate and was not on his A game. But when the president Cleaned Romney’s clock in the last two debates and Biden cleaned Ryans clock in the VP debate they had nothing but excuses for why their guys didn’t do so well. They didn’t get a chance to speak!! Biden was being rude!! Obama was lying!! It’s truly pathetic when even with polls showing people think Romney lost they won’t admit their guy didn’t do so hot.
I will be so relieved when Election night is over and Obama has won his second term. I have faith in him but it will be a relief to finally get that scary possibility of a Romney presidency off the books once and for all.
They can say he is illegitimate all they want but even 20 years from now almost no one will be giving Romney any thought at all, he will be forgotten, but people will remember Obama. That is all the proof of his legitimacy as an excellent president that is needed no matter what Republicans say who try their best to forget Bush was ever President. The democrats have now had two excellent presidents in the last 20 years and it’s becoming more and more obvious that there must not be any good politicians left in the republican party.
Only when the Republican Party moves back to the mainstream, and can elect a person such as Jon Huntsman, will they be a serious alternative to the Democrats.
We need a Nelson Rockefeller type Republican, which is not in vogue right now, sadly!
Excellent discussion here Professor! Many people don’t really have a clear understanding of the EC. You elucidate points I think perplex a considerable number.
I think it would be interesting to hear your thoughts on H.J.Res. 121: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to increase by 29 votes the number of electoral votes awarded to the candidate for President who receives the largest percentage of the popular vote. This resolution was proposed by Steve Israel, DNY and has been referred to committee. Probably no way it would pass in this present climate.
Has there been many proposals to change the EC in the past? If so, how far did they get?
I do not see the point of increasing the number of electoral votes awarded to the candidate for President who received the largest percentage of popular votes. Is this to guarantee that a Bush-Gore situation could not arise? It does not seem to make sense to me at all! It also has ZERO chance of being enacted!
There have been proposals to get rid of the Electoral College, but it would require a constitutional amendment, which requires a two thirds vote of each house of Congress and support from a majority of each house of 38 state legislatures (3/4 of the states). That is not going to happen!
The idea of just having the popular vote has been proposed, including after 2000, but it went nowhere!