How the Electoral College stands today (Updated and with comments)

The American Interest: Romney Gaining on Obama   "That still leaves with President Obama headed for a narrow 285-253 Electoral College majority and four more years in the White House, but as of this moment in time, the trend favors his challenger."


The Cook Report reports with an interactive bar chart that we don't know how to include in this blog. It compares the Electoral College in 2008 compared with the current EC outlook.
Beware those who say we should end the Electoral College. I refer you to this Tunnel Wall post from October 2011:


Keep the Electoral College!   "Popular Vote or the Electoral College?  "The Electoral College preserves federalism, encourages candidates to build national coalitions, and grants definitive electoral outcomes. It requires a presidential candidate to win simultaneous elections across 50 states and the District of Columbia."
 Let's look at it this way, shall we?  Look at this map of the United States mainland taken at night and observe the lights. Some areas are very bright while others have few lights, but the most brilliant patches of light are the areas that will choose our president if this nation abandons the Electoral College. TD

Update: The Pro's and Con's of the Electoral College System

"There have, in its 200 year history, been a number of critics and proposed reforms to the Electoral College system - most of them trying to eliminate it. But there are also staunch defenders of the Electoral College who, though perhaps less vocal than its critics, offer very powerful arguments in its favor."

Those who object to the Electoral College system and favor a direct popular election of the president generally do so on four grounds: (Much more on these points at the link)

• the possibility of electing a minority president
• the risk of so-called "faithless" Electors,
• the possible role of the Electoral College in depressing voter turnout, and
• its failure to accurately reflect the national popular will.

Proponents of the Electoral College system normally defend it on the philosophical grounds that it:

• contributes to the cohesiveness of the country by requiring a distribution of popular support to be elected president
• enhances the status of minority interests,
• contributes to the political stability of the nation by encouraging a two-party system, and
• maintains a federal system of government and representation.

This excerpt relates to the point made by the Tunnel Dweller above:  "Recognizing the strong regional interests and loyalties which have played so great a role in American history, proponents argue that the Electoral College system contributes to the cohesiveness of the country be requiring a distribution of popular support to be elected president, without such a mechanism, they point out, president would be selected either through the domination of one populous region over the others or through the domination of large metropolitan areas over the rural ones."

Conclusion

The Electoral College has performed its function for over 200 years (and in over 50 presidential elections) by ensuring that the President of the United States has both sufficient popular support to govern and that his popular support is sufficiently distributed throughout the country to enable him to govern effectively.

Although there were a few anomalies in its early history, none have occurred in the past century. Proposals to abolish the Electoral College, though frequently put forward, have failed largely because the alternatives to it appear more problematic than is the College itself.

The fact that the Electoral College was originally designed to solve one set of problems but today serves to solve an entirely different set of problems is a tribute to the genius of the Founding Fathers.

 More here, plus the comments to this post by Toto.

Keep the Electoral College! (updated)

Popular Vote or the Electoral College?  "The Electoral College preserves federalism, encourages candidates to build national coalitions, and grants definitive electoral outcomes. It requires a presidential candidate to win simultaneous elections across 50 states and the District of Columbia."

Lets look at it this way, shall we?  Look at this map of the United States mainland taken at night and observe the lights. Some areas are very bright while others have few lights, but the most brilliant patches of light are the areas that will choose our president if this nation abandons the Electoral College.

The great swath of the plains will have little voice -candidates will rarely visit there- while the brilliant patches along the Eastern Seaboard, Great Lakes and Pacific Coast will pretty much be the chooser of the candidates.
Now compare this photo with the Electoral map of the US below and see which political spectrum would have the say on presidential elections. Blue states are Democrat-controlled, (in case you were not aware) and the Pacific Coast area sends us Nancy Pelosi along with Fortney "Pete" Stark, Maxine Waters, Jerry Brown and left-wing indoctrinating school curriculum.
The Great Lakes area gave us Obama, Reverend Wright, Rahm Emmanuel and Chicago-style politics. The Eastern Seaboard sent us Barney Frank, Carl Levin, Bernie Sanders, Al Sharpton and mushy RINOs such as Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins and Mitt Romney ( the latter being an excellent debater, however).

The Electoral College map tells me the Democrats will be at the forefront of any fight to replace the EC with the popular vote and will make eloquent arguments about "putting the American people back in charge of our nation's destiny".

The Electoral College is our best safeguard against electing trendy,"movement" candidates, its main failure being the election of a "celebrity" president such as Barack Obama, the darling of Hollywood, the news media and the PC entertainment industry. But it is our best hope.

We must keep the Electoral College.

The Tunnel Dweller.



fotosearch.com



Update: Hans von Spakovsky: Destroying the Electoral College: The Anti-Federalist National Popular Vote Scheme  "The National Popular Vote (NPV) plan is the latest in a long line of schemes designed to replace the Electoral College. Imbued with the ideals of this nation’s Founders, the Electoral College has proved itself to be both effective in providing orderly elections for President and resilient in allowing a stable transfer of power of the leadership of the world’s greatest democracy. Therefore, while it would be a mistake to replace the Electoral College, replacing this system with the NPV would be a disaster."

Democrats: untrustworthy stewards of this nation for over 160 years

In the 1860's just as in the 2000's, Democrats have been the party to cut and run in the face of adversity. During the Civil War, Democrats ran on the platform of "forget the countless thousands who died, let slavery continue to exist". TD

The Democrat Party is the real symbol of the Confederacy  . . . "Polities where the Democrats enjoy one-party rule today include basket cases like Detroit, where African Americans endure some of the worst living conditions in the country, and creative-class playgrounds like San Francisco, whose black population was purged in the period of urban renewal. " . . . 

Now today, regarding the Electoral College, Democrats would be happy to discard the wisdom of the nation's Founders if it hinders their quest for power. Their cause is greatly aided by ignorance in the media and in our educational system that produces their candidates we see this election cycle and the voters who support them. Bear in mind this all started when Hillary mentioned the Electoral College as just one of many reasons she claimed for losing. TD

Restoring States' Rights to Presidential Elections  . . . "Restoring the rights and powers of the sovereign states is the linchpin of everything we need to begin to solve our problems.  The power of state legislatures remains in the language of the Constitution, and those rights ought to be given life again.  If that happens, we can begin the peaceful revolution our nation needs.  It is doable and ought to be done.  Nothing keeps Republican state legislatures from beginning the process but the guts and grit of their own members — and there is no reason for delay at all."

Oh, yes, and they all suddenly want to abolish the Electoral College! Had HRC won, they would be singing its praises.

Warren Wants to Eliminate the Electoral College, Which Would Cause Havoc in Our System
"You hate third party candidates now? Try competing without the Electoral College."

"I wouldn’t call our Founding Fathers perfect, but man did they leave us one of the greatest documents penned in the English language. Their brilliance provided America not only with the Bill of Rights, but with the Electoral College.

"Grumbles about the Electoral College have existed for a long time, but after President Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton, its elimination shot to the top of the Democrats list of issues in their campaigns.

"Sen. Elizabeth Warren proclaimed her wish to abolish the Electoral College at a recent town hall, but I don’t think she’s given it much thought to the mess this would create."

. . . 

People forget that Hillary only received 48% of the popular vote, not 50% and above. In other words, she did not receive the majority of the popular vote. In 2000, Al Gore received 48.38% of the popular vote.

"Without the Electoral College, we could end up with a president who only had 25% of the vote. Wallison "points out that the government could add a run-off amendment, which means the top two or three candidates would hold another election:

Of course, we could graft a run-off system onto our Constitution; the two top candidates in, say, a 10-person race, would then run against one another for the presidency. But that could easily mean that the American people would have a choice between a candidate of the pro-choice party and a candidate of the pro-gun party. If you thought the choice was bad this year, it could be far worse.

"A mess. An absolute mess. These Democrats have to think long and hard before they shout from mountain tops stupid ideas just to appease the feels of some people."

Wake up Democrats, our party is un-American  . . . " 'Democrats and many in media now accuse Mr. Trump of totalitarian methods and objectives,” wrote Ted Van Dyk recently in the Wall Street Journal. “There is much to fault in the Trump presidency, but the totalitarian tendencies appear to flow from our own party.' ” . . .

The Electoral College: America's newest "brain trust" wants to abolish it

How can people think that Hillary Clinton was ever, ever worth doing this damage to our nation and our Constitution? This has all been generated because of her bitterness, you know?
Do we want our nation's President chosen by the same people who elected Gavin Newsom and NY Mayor Bill de Blasio?  TD

Wreck the Electoral College, Destroy the Country

"While you were sleeping, the Democrats (abetted by some deviant Republicans) have been working on a plan that would destroy the diversity of the American political system and bring the nation to the brink of civil war. The plan is called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, and tens of millions of dollars have already been spent over several decades trying to implement it. Fourteen blue states and the District of Columbia have already joined the Compact, which means they are 70% on the way to making their proposal the law of the land." . . .
. . . "The Democrats’ plan is designed to eliminate the influence of the Electoral College in choosing the nation’s president, no doubt because while Hillary won the popular vote she failed win necessary votes in the Electoral College. Eliminating the influence of the Electoral College would end the diversity now embodied in the federal system with its division of powers between Washington and the fifty states. The fact that a party which presents itself as a defender of diversity should be leading the charge to eliminate the nation’s most powerful source of diversity should be all that is required to understand the threat their agenda poses to what has been the nation’s constitutional way of life for 232 years." . . .

What appears to deprive the populace of its power to decide a president is the very mechanism that preserves its power. The Electoral College works that way because the United States isn’t a pure democracy.  . . . "The purpose of the Electoral College is to balance voting power across states so no one region of the country can gain too much control. If a president is elected by a simple majority of votes, a candidate who is wildly popular in one region (e.g., Ted Cruz in Texas, Mitt Romney in Utah) can ignore smaller regions and campaign only where large majorities are possible. Or a candidate who kills in California and New York can write off “flyover country” completely.
"If, however, the Electoral College elects a president, a candidate who is wildly popular in one region must also prevail in a number of sub-elections to win. The Electoral College ensures a better result for the country as a whole than the democratic power play wherein 51 percent of us matter and 49 percent of us don’t." . . .

In defense of the Electoral College

"If anything, it was the Electoral College that made it possible to end slavery, since Abraham Lincoln earned only 39 percent of the popular vote in the election of 1860, but won a crushing victory in the Electoral College. This, in large measure, was why Southern slaveholders stampeded to secession in 1860-61. They could do the numbers as well as anyone, and realized that the electoral college would only produce more anti-slavery Northern presidents."  Refute that, if you can.

Weasel Zippers

"Here’s good recitation of the benefits of the Electoral College. And no, it wasn’t created to benefit slavery as liberal media has been claiming, a complete bastardization of history."

If the WaPo article won't open, try this.  . . . "Actually, there have been only five occasions when a closely divided popular vote and the electoral vote have failed to point in the same direction. No matter. After last week's results, we're hearing a litany of complaints: the electoral college is undemocratic, the electoral college is unnecessary, the electoral college was invented to protect slavery - and the demand to push it down the memory hole." . . .

Democrat Colorado Governor Would Sign Bill Circumventing The Electoral College

So the next presidents will be chosen by California and New York!

  Daily Wire  "On Sunday, the Democratic governor of Colorado, Jared Polis, stated that he would sign a bill allowing his state to circumvent the Electoral College, giving his state’s electoral votes to whomever won the national popular vote, thus allowing population heavy areas to determine the presidential election."
Polis told The Hill that he viewed the Electoral College as an “undemocratic relic,” adding, “I’ve long supported electing the president by who gets the most votes. It’s a way to move towards direct election of the president.” . . .



Why We Need the Electoral College  

Those who complain now that it is unfair for Donald Trump to become president when he received fewer votes than Hillary Clinton have not considered either the implications of what they are proposing or the genius of the Framers.

. . . "Many people who are currently calling for the abolition of the Electoral College, however, don’t realize the chaos that would result.

"Two elements of the “Great Compromise” among the large and small states led to the ratification of the Constitution. A House of Representatives would reflect the popular vote—disadvantaging the small states—but a Senate would give the small states equal representation with the large ones.
"This idea was carried through to the Electoral College, where each state’s allocation of electoral votes is simply the total of its representation in the House and Senate. This again gave the smaller states some additional power in the important choice of the president.
"Leaving aside the fact that a deal is a deal, there are very practical reasons why we will always need the Electoral College under our current constitutional system." . . . 

Electoral College History

Dem introduces bills to eliminate Electoral College, stop presidents from pardoning themselves

Was Hillary Clinton really worth committing violence to the Constitution?

The Constitutional provision for the Electoral College  Article II

Section 1. The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows
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: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector. . . .

The Hill

Weasel Zippers

"Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), a vocal critic of President Trump, on Thursday introduced two bills to eliminate the Electoral College and prevent presidents from pardoning themselves or their family members.

"Cohen introduced the constitutional amendments on the first night of the 116th Congress, both digs at Trump. 

Cohen of Tennessee

“ 'Presidents should not pardon themselves, their families, their administration or campaign staff," Cohen said in a statement. "This constitutional amendment would expressly prohibit this and any future president, from abusing the pardon power.”

"The amendments are unlikely to pass since they require a two-thirds vote in both chambers of Congress and then must be ratified by three-fourths of the states." . . .

"More than a century ago, we amended our Constitution to provide for the direct election of U.S. Senators," he added. "It is past time to directly elect our President and Vice President.”

Because each Senator represents only their own state. A President represents each and every state and this politician knows that. He appears to want every president elected by the liberal coasts, placing every legislative branch under the rule of coastal elites.
The Electoral College makes the President the choice of the entire nation, from coast to coast. TD

In defense of the Electoral College
"If anything, it was the Electoral College that made it possible to end slavery, since Abraham Lincoln earned only 39 percent of the popular vote in the election of 1860, but won a crushing victory in the Electoral College. This, in large measure, was why Southern slaveholders stampeded to secession in 1860-61. They could do the numbers as well as anyone, and realized that the electoral college would only produce more anti-slavery Northern presidents.' "  Refute that, if you can.

On the Electoral College: UPDATED

"The case against America’s idiosyncratic election system isn’t as simple as you think." 

 Four Theses on the Electoral College  . . . "Democrats are seething at having lost the presidency while winning the popular vote for the second time in the twenty-first century. Liberal media outlets are publishing a flurry of pieces attacking America’s allegedly antiquated system for electing its presidents, and social media is abuzz with petitions to replace it with a national popular vote system. This reaction is understandable: Our democratic instincts tells us that all votes should count exactly equally, and that the person who gets the most total votes should win.

"But the case against James Madison’s original design isn’t quite that simple. Here are four points that liberals upset with the outcome might weigh against the visceral indignation of an electoral-popular vote split." . . .

You should know the above map was prior to the election and contained this:

Hillary wins the popular vote – not  . . . "But the Electoral College brilliantly smooths out the variances in the voting proclivities among states and regions.  Farmers in the middle of the country and importers and exporters on the shore get roughly equal say, as do Madison Ave. execs and factory workers in Tennessee.

"Shortcomings?  Sure.  The E.C. can make an R vote meaningless in a very few heavily D states or vice versa.  But without the Electoral College, the country’s entire population is subject to the disproportionate voting preferences of the few most populous states."

NRO: Why We Have an Electoral College  . . . "Every state gets one electoral vote for each of its congressional representatives. This means that the larger states have more say in electing a president, but no state has no say — each, no matter how sparsely populated, gets at least three votes, one for the minimum congressman-at-large and one for each senator." . . .

UPDATE: The Electoral College is ‘Absolutely Brilliant’ Nationally, But Mob Rule Remains at State Level 

 "There have been countless stories, news clips, soc media vids etc of liberals whining and complaining about the electoral system. It’s very existence is to prevent what these sore losers are demanding, mob rule. If the electoral college was not in place a handful of states would decide elections for the entire nation. Do you want New York, Pennsylvania, Florida, Illinois, California or even Texas deciding who the next President is? If democrats and all the snowflakes, participating in Soros organized protests coast-to-coast, were to get their way that is exactly what will happen!"

Election Integrity and the Electoral College; One underappreciated benefit of voting by states.

Volokh Conspiracy  "With the Electoral College still in the news, I thought I'd note one small argument for keeping it that I haven't seen much elsewhere. (Though I'm quite sure it isn't original to me.)

"As Ross Douthat suggests, the stakes in the electoral college debate may be smaller than we think. Today's institution may not have the deliberative advantages the Founders hoped for, but it also may not produce quite as many democratic costs as critics fear. (Cf. Lyman Stone's argument that the U.S. electoral system actually has less structural bias than those of peer countries.)

"Ross's claim is that a state-by-state vote in the electoral college encourages broad electoral coalitions, as opposed to regional parties chasing 51% majorities. With the country so polarized, he writes, both parties are chasing 51% anyway—so maybe all the electoral college does is to delegitimize the occasional winner.

"My suspicion, though, is that it's precisely in these circumstances—with high degrees of polarization and partisan distrust—that the electoral college does the most for election integrity.

"In a nationwide popular vote, every false vote that's cast anywhere in the country adds to the vote total in exactly the same way. For the same reason, every true vote that's suppressed anywhere in the country will subtract equally from an opponent's numbers. (Thus the concerns about nationwide recounts: as Keith noted, "we might need to be prepared to deal with the new incentive to shade the vote count in every county in the Union.")

"A world of highly polarized states makes the problem even worse. In a deep-red or deep-blue state, where one party occupies the vast majority of state offices, there'd be means, motive, and opportunity for serious fraud. The whole nation would be at stake, and fewer people would be in positions of power to discover or punish any shenanigans. And if you think your political opponents might be rigging a national election somewhere halfway across the country, well, you're just a sucker if you don't beat them to it.

"By contrast, in a districted system like the electoral college, widespread election fraud in Alabama or Massachusetts would be entirely pointless. " . . .

Colorado Governor Signs National Popular Vote Bill Into Law

Weasel Zippers

"If the Democrats are successful in nullifying the Electoral College, the country will essentially be ruled by the East and West coasts and the urban enclaves in between. They will have almost achieved single party rule."

"Via The Hill:

Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) signed into law Friday a bill that would award the state’s Electoral College votes to the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote.

Polis signed the measure after both chambers of the state’s legislature passed the bill last month along party lines, with Democrats pulling heavily for the measure.

Colorado now joins 11 other states and the District of Columbia as part of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

“It is important to understand that the National Popular Vote bill significantly amplifies Colorado’s voice in choosing the president of the United States,” John Koza, chairman of National Popular Vote, said in a press release.

The joint agreement only goes into effect if enough states sign on to total the number needed to win the presidency — 270 electoral votes.

The addition of Colorado’s nine electoral votes brings the total to 181.

Keep reading…

In defense of the Electoral College 
"If anything, it was the Electoral College that made it possible to end slavery, since Abraham Lincoln earned only 39 percent of the popular vote in the election of 1860, but won a crushing victory in the Electoral College. This, in large measure, was why Southern slaveholders stampeded to secession in 1860-61. They could do the numbers as well as anyone, and realized that the electoral college would only produce more anti-slavery Northern presidents."  Refute that, if you can.

The blue would have given us Hillary.

The Electoral College dispute exposes the Progressives’ world of lies
With the popular vote system, these states will run our country. And with Texas becoming Californicated, it may not be our bulwark against socialism and foreign colonization for long. TD