T
theterminatorfan
Guest
There must be a step after the votes come in, where it then moves to the electorial college. Anyone read how all that works?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
A
AdidasF50
Guest
Depending on the population each state gets a certain amount of votes. Whatever candidate wins that states popular vote wins all of the electoral votes. The president that receives 270 votes wins the election.
The thing to watch for tho is the purple states like Michigan and Florida who have a lot of electoral votes who ever manages to win those states will probably win the election.
The thing to watch for tho is the purple states like Michigan and Florida who have a lot of electoral votes who ever manages to win those states will probably win the election.
B
Bill K
Guest
The winner of the majority of the votes in a state wins that state's electoral votes. Then the electoral votes are counted and the winner is declared. In case of a tie, the House of Representatives elects the new President.
The process is designed so that states with large populations like New York or California don't have an over influence on the outcome of the election. The tie breaker is the House of Representatives because in theory members of the House are closer to their constituency, the people.
One must remember that we are not, and never were, a democracy. We are a representative republic.
The process is designed so that states with large populations like New York or California don't have an over influence on the outcome of the election. The tie breaker is the House of Representatives because in theory members of the House are closer to their constituency, the people.
One must remember that we are not, and never were, a democracy. We are a representative republic.
P
Poohcat1
Guest
The members of the elec. college represent a given number of voters in each state. So, if John Smith got a million votes in Minnesota and Jane Doe got one million two hundred, the 17 total electoral votes from the state of Minnesota would go to Jane Doe even though she only got two hundred more votes in the popular vote. In otherwords, majority rules. This sounds fair until you consider that California or New York who have huge populations, therefore a lot more electoral votes could swing an election to someone who did not receive the overall popular vote in the country but had received the popular vote in their particular state thus getting all the massive electoral votes. That is why the politicians concentrate so hard on those states that have a greater population. Second, they go after the swing states (like Michigan and Ohio) who are usually pretty evenly divided between candidates. It is a system that "tries" to make sure that the person who is finally elected is the one that that majority of the population want. Some elections have been so close that only a few votes separate the winner from the loser in popular vote, but show a major difference in electoral votes. If we went strictly to a popular vote, Minnesota, Wisconsin, ND and SD, probably Iowa and Nebraska all together could not equal the vote tally coming out of California therefore allowing one segment of the country to make the decision for all. Kind of happens anyway, but the electoral vote still seems the fairest. At least that's how I understand it.