# Electoral College v. Popular Vote - How Big Is Too Big? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [September 10, 2020, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262 "2020-09-10T14:14:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/201 "2020-09-16T16:08:04Z")
I think you need to recognize that our country might not exist _at all_ if small states weren’t given concessions. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![doreen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/858c86/32.png) [@doreen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doreen)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/202 "2020-09-16T16:16:32Z")
OK, I acknowledge that - but what has that got to do with whether it’s a good system or a fair system? Basically, what you’re saying is that the Electoral College is a result of small states saying- " We play the way I want or I’ll take my ball and go home" and nobody has ever disputed that. Just because one group has the power to do that, doesn’t mean that their way is the best way or the fairest way - which TBH, is something I find almost amusing about this whole thing. Somehow, it’s unfair and bad for the majority to have more power - but the reverse is just fine. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/203 "2020-09-16T16:22:15Z")
> [@Ludovic](#): > > It seems that most people are now talking about whether the electoral college is a good thing or not, and not how large a difference is too big. > > I’d be interested in hearing from people who are _defending_ the EC as a good thing to answer how large a discrepancy would just seem wrong. Would it be right if 75% of the people voted one way but the candidate with 25% of the popular vote got the Presidency? I still don’t see any defender of the EC answering this question. _Is_ there a lopsided enough result that it wouldn’t feel right? How Big Is Too Big? If you think no amount of lopsidedness would feel unfair, could you say so? ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/204 "2020-09-16T16:34:33Z")
> [@YamatoTwinkie](#): > > To be clear, the EC did not produce a result in 2016 that was at all tolerable to me either. But keep in mind, for **30 out of 50** states, the final EC result matched what the population wanted. I think it’d be difficult to call ourselves the _United States of America_ , if only 20/50 states could somehow _completely_ overrule everyone else, as many posters in this thread seem to be in favor of. Why not? Why should the arrangement of support by 51 geographical boundaries matter for the election of a person whose constituency transcends states boundaries and is for the entire population? Twenty states are NOT overruling thirty, people are having their say over fewer people in an election, which is how elections work. ---
**Author:** ![Red\_Wiggler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/red_wiggler/32/13190_2.png) [@Red\_Wiggler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Red_Wiggler)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/205 "2020-09-16T16:40:01Z")
It would be great if the majority of voters – regardless of where they live – got the same amount of electoral consideration and power that the minority of voters receive. Living in a country where the national leader doesn’t have the support (or is unable to gain the support) of the majority of voters is a recipe for future disaster. It’s the kind of thing that has toppled younger democracies who have decided to emulate our system instead of a more mature and sensible system like that used in most of the other western democracies. Ending the EC may also lead to a boom in electoral participation as hundreds of thousands of dispirited Republicans in California and tens of thousands of Democrats in Alabama find new reasons for casting a presidential ballot. Why should voters in ten states determine our head of state when we could meaningfully involve voters in all 50? Lastly, if you were designing a new American constitution from scratch, how many of you would copy the current system and, if so, why? ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/206 "2020-09-16T16:52:35Z")
> [@Red\_Wiggler](#): > > Lastly, if you were designing a new American constitution from scratch, how many of you would copy the current system and, if so, why? Wasn’t there a thread similar to this? Many of the ideas were absolutely horrible. Ah here we go: > [@How should the US Constitution be amended?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-us-constitution-be-amended/854408): > > With an eye towards polling this fine group about how the US Constitution should be amended, I hereby throw open the floor to real, honest, legitimate suggestions. I will cull the best ones, and/or the most popular ones as deemed by me, into a poll later. What do you Dopers say? How should the United States Constitution be amended? As for myself, I suggest the following amendments be made: Amend the Second Amendment, specifying that individuals may own firearms as they deem reasonably necess… ---
**Author:** ![Red\_Wiggler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/red_wiggler/32/13190_2.png) [@Red\_Wiggler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Red_Wiggler)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/207 "2020-09-16T17:06:16Z")
There will always be terrible suggestions, RJ, (I probably made some unpopular ones in there myself) but I’d like someone to answer my simple and direct question first. ---
**Author:** ![YamatoTwinkie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/cc9497/32.png) [@YamatoTwinkie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YamatoTwinkie)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/208 "2020-09-16T17:46:51Z")
> [@doreen](#): > > Somehow, it’s unfair and bad for the majority to have more power - but the reverse is just fine. I disagree with this. “Majority of Population Rules” already has power via the House. “Majority of States Rules” has power via the Senate. The EC is a quasi-hybrid of the two when selecting a president. Currently there’s only a very limited amount of things each branch can do without consent of the other two. I believe most posters here with the “EC bad! Majority rules!” mentality here want those same 20/50 states from 2016 to both select the president _and_ control the senate (or remove it altogether). They want to go from the current system where we just have _gridlock_ when we can’t get clear agreement between population and states, to one where 48% of voters (and 20/50 states) control _every aspect_ of government. I don’t think that is particularly healthy for the country either, even if my own political inclinations happen to be with the 20/50. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/209 "2020-09-16T19:27:26Z")
> [@doreen](#): > > Basically, what you’re saying is that the Electoral College is a result of small states saying- “We play the way I want or I’ll take my ball and go home” and nobody has ever disputed that. Just because one group has the power to do that, doesn’t mean that their way is the best way or the fairest way It _is_ good and fair if we limit consideration to practical systems of government. The electoral college isn’t some ridiculous mathematical concept, it is the result of political comprimises made to create the federal republic we live in. Unlike the three-fifths compromise, the issues that forced America’s founding fathers to compromise on an electoral college are still extant. Small states still exist and it is not in their interest to use a national popular vote. Then as now, you still need small states to get on board with major changes to our system of government. You may think it is unfair to give a minority an advantage over the majority, but I think such a broad moral statement is naive. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/210 "2020-09-16T19:30:39Z")
> [@Ludovic](#): > > still don’t see any defender of the EC answering this question. _Is_ there a lopsided enough result that it wouldn’t feel right? How Big Is Too Big? > > If you think no amount of lopsidedness would feel unfair, could you say so? Didn’t I? > > [@Max\_S](#): > > > > > [@Jas09](#): > > > > > > How big of a difference between the national popular vote is too big before you would agree with the person quoted above that American could no longer be described as a Democratic Republic? > > > > I support the Electoral College as an institution, but my opinion on whether this country is a Democratic Republic is not necessarily contingent on a gap between the national popular vote for President and the actual election results. > > > [@Max\_S](#): > > > > To me, having the popular vote is only good in so far as it lends the government credibility. This is directly relevant to the original post: some credibility is necessary, but I do not think 47% of the popular vote is nearly low enough to cause anarchy in the face of revolts against an illegitimate government. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/211 "2020-09-16T19:35:22Z")
So you would be okay with a 25%-75% gap? You did say that 47% was okay. ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/212 "2020-09-16T19:51:35Z")
No I think he means that the losing candidate receiving 47% isn’t too low to be legitimate. It’s certainly possible that Trump could win with 45% this time, or even lower. I could see an EC supporter saying that is still enough (although at least a few have mentioned 10% as a cutoff point). But certainly a 60-40 loss is too much, right? ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/213 "2020-09-16T20:57:58Z")
> [@Ludovic](#): > > So you would be okay with a 25%-75% gap? You did say that 47% was okay. I would be okay with it so long as I don’t think people will revert to anarchy due to perceived illegitimacy of government. There is no magic number, because me being ‘ok’ with the results of the popular vote have nothing whatsoever to do with the popular vote, and everything to do with how I see people reacting to it. If all of America was made entirely of people who think just like me, then so long as I think proper procedure was followed, I would be ‘ok’ with the results. That means the bare minimum is… (Give me a few minutes to crunch some numbers…) ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/214 "2020-09-16T21:04:13Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > If all of America was made entirely of people who think just like me, then so long as I think proper procedure was followed, I would be ‘ok’ with the results. That means the bare minimum is… **23.52%** , or possibly a little bit less than that because of third-parties. Details below. > **How did I get 23.52%?** > > > I’ve made a little table based on data from the [United States Elections Project](http://www.electproject.org/2016g) and the [National Archives](https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/allocation): > > > > > **Table 1: Real-life 2016 Data** > > > > > > > | State | EC Votes | Turnout % | Voting Eligible Population | Turnout | > > > > | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | > > > > | Wyoming | 3 | 58.80% | 429,682 | 252,653 | > > > > | Vermont | 3 | 61.00% | 494,871 | 301,871 | > > > > | District of Columbia | 3 | 54.90% | 515,248 | 282,871 | > > > > | Alaska | 3 | 52.80% | 522,679 | 275,975 | > > > > | North Dakota | 3 | 56.50% | 566,783 | 320,232 | > > > > | South Dakota | 3 | 70.00% | 631,173 | 441,821 | > > > > | Delaware | 3 | 63.70% | 691,720 | 440,626 | > > > > | Montana | 3 | 64.20% | 804,250 | 516,329 | > > > > | Rhode Island | 4 | 60.40% | 786,012 | 474,751 | > > > > | Hawaii | 4 | 64.50% | 1,012,860 | 653,295 | > > > > | New Hampshire | 4 | 59.10% | 1,042,795 | 616,292 | > > > > | Maine | 4 | 42.30% | 1,058,372 | 447,691 | > > > > | Idaho | 4 | 59.20% | 1,166,706 | 690,690 | > > > > | Nebraska | 5 | 62.20% | 1,343,821 | 835,857 | > > > > | West Virginia | 5 | 56.40% | 1,423,031 | 802,589 | > > > > | New Mexico | 5 | 68.40% | 1,464,515 | 1,001,728 | > > > > | Nevada | 6 | 57.70% | 1,961,587 | 1,131,836 | > > > > | Utah | 6 | 58.60% | 1,991,885 | 1,167,245 | > > > > | Kansas | 6 | 60.00% | 2,054,025 | 1,232,415 | > > > > | Arkansas | 6 | 70.70% | 2,140,097 | 1,513,049 | > > > > | Mississippi | 6 | 66.40% | 2,191,241 | 1,454,984 | > > > > | Iowa | 6 | 67.20% | 2,288,536 | 1,537,896 | > > > > | Connecticut | 7 | 64.70% | 2,582,761 | 1,671,046 | > > > > | Oklahoma | 7 | 74.10% | 2,778,219 | 2,058,660 | > > > > | Oregon | 7 | 55.20% | 3,024,174 | 1,669,344 | > > > > | Kentucky | 8 | 62.20% | 3,282,420 | 2,041,665 | > > > > | Louisiana | 8 | 61.80% | 3,384,435 | 2,091,581 | > > > > | Alabama | 9 | 62.80% | 3,609,447 | 2,266,733 | > > > > | South Carolina | 9 | 57.40% | 3,709,283 | 2,129,128 | > > > > | Colorado | 9 | 71.40% | 3,974,405 | 2,837,725 | > > > > | Minnesota | 10 | 64.40% | 3,973,204 | 2,558,743 | > > > > | Maryland | 10 | 54.50% | 4,189,616 | 2,283,341 | > > > > | Wisconsin | 10 | 56.80% | 4,285,071 | 2,433,920 | > > > > | Missouri | 10 | 64.50% | 4,517,925 | 2,914,062 | > > > > | Arizona | 11 | 60.80% | 4,740,310 | 2,882,108 | > > > > | Indiana | 11 | 62.90% | 4,849,937 | 3,050,610 | > > > > | Tennessee | 11 | 52.30% | 4,909,426 | 2,567,630 | > > > > | Massachusetts | 11 | 66.20% | 4,948,028 | 3,275,595 | > > > > | Washington | 12 | 63.60% | 5,123,020 | 3,258,241 | > > > > | Virginia | 13 | 59.10% | 6,027,152 | 3,562,047 | > > > > | New Jersey | 14 | 56.70% | 6,013,656 | 3,409,743 | > > > > | North Carolina | 15 | 58.60% | 7,352,501 | 4,308,566 | > > > > | Georgia | 16 | 51.10% | 6,959,963 | 3,556,541 | > > > > | Michigan | 16 | 51.40% | 7,420,628 | 3,814,203 | > > > > | Ohio | 18 | 56.80% | 8,736,808 | 4,962,507 | > > > > | Illinois | 20 | 63.70% | 8,985,443 | 5,723,727 | > > > > | Pennsylvania | 20 | 66.10% | 9,691,160 | 6,405,857 | > > > > | New York | 29 | 64.70% | 13,604,645 | 8,802,205 | > > > > | Florida | 29 | 50.20% | 14,601,066 | 7,329,735 | > > > > | Texas | 38 | 69.50% | 17,448,910 | 12,126,992 | > > > > | California | 55 | 59.50% | 25,104,844 | 14,937,382 | > > > > | — | — | — | — | — | > > > > | United States | 538 | 60.65% | 226,410,346 | 137,322,334 | > > > > The table is sorted first by electoral votes, then by voting eligible population. Simple addition tells me that we can obtain 270 votes by winning D.C. and the least populous 40 states (WY thru NJ on table). To calculate what percentage that is, first I calculate how many votes would have been necessary to win all of each state’s electoral votes in 2016. I will assume that is floor(VEP/2)+1 - in reality it will be a bit lower since third-parties allow for non-absolute majorities. > > > > Maine and Nebraska forgo the winner-takes-all system, but they still award two electoral votes each based on a statewide election. So I won’t treat them any different. > > > > > **Table 2: Votes to Win** > > > > > > > | State | Votes to Win | > > > > | --- | --- | > > > > | Wyoming | 214,842 | > > > > | Vermont | 247,436 | > > > > | District of Columbia | 257,625 | > > > > | Alaska | 261,340 | > > > > | North Dakota | 283,392 | > > > > | South Dakota | 315,587 | > > > > | Delaware | 345,861 | > > > > | Montana | 402,126 | > > > > | Rhode Island | 393,007 | > > > > | Hawaii | 506,431 | > > > > | New Hampshire | 521,398 | > > > > | Maine | 529,187 | > > > > | Idaho | 583,354 | > > > > | Nebraska | 671,911 | > > > > | West Virginia | 711,516 | > > > > | New Mexico | 732,258 | > > > > | Nevada | 980,794 | > > > > | Utah | 995,943 | > > > > | Kansas | 1,027,013 | > > > > | Arkansas | 1,070,049 | > > > > | Mississippi | 1,095,621 | > > > > | Iowa | 1,144,269 | > > > > | Connecticut | 1,291,381 | > > > > | Oklahoma | 1,389,110 | > > > > | Oregon | 1,512,088 | > > > > | Kentucky | 1,641,211 | > > > > | Louisiana | 1,692,218 | > > > > | Alabama | 1,804,724 | > > > > | South Carolina | 1,854,642 | > > > > | Colorado | 1,987,203 | > > > > | Minnesota | 1,986,603 | > > > > | Maryland | 2,094,809 | > > > > | Wisconsin | 2,142,536 | > > > > | Missouri | 2,258,963 | > > > > | Arizona | 2,370,156 | > > > > | Indiana | 2,424,969 | > > > > | Tennessee | 2,454,714 | > > > > | Massachusetts | 2,474,015 | > > > > | Washington | 2,561,511 | > > > > | Virginia | 3,013,577 | > > > > | New Jersey | 3,006,829 | > > > > | — | — | > > > > | United States | 53,252,219 | > > > > Then for the percentage you asked. It’s the total votes needed to win divided by the total votes cast, in this case, **23.52%** of the national popular vote. I would not be okay with results much lower than that (remember I overlooked the effect of third-parties). ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/215 "2020-09-16T21:14:19Z")
I just showed how the electoral college can award the presidency to a candidate who wins less than a quarter of the national popular vote. I think it follows logically that if this is unacceptable, the electoral college as implemented allows for unacceptable results. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Yookeroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yookeroo/32/323_2.png) [@Yookeroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yookeroo)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2020, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/216 "2020-09-16T22:21:16Z")
> [@YamatoTwinkie](#): > > To be clear, the EC did not produce a result in 2016 that was at all tolerable to me either. But keep in mind, for **30 out of 50** states, the final EC result matched what the population wanted. I think it’d be difficult to call ourselves the _United States of America_ , if only 20/50 states could somehow _completely_ overrule everyone else, as many posters in this thread seem to be in favor of. > > Either result would have underscored cracks at the foundation. You either would have had a president that a _supermajority_ of states didn’t want, or a president that a _small majority_ of populace didn’t want. I don’t give a fuck what the states want. I care what the people want. Giving states what they want has failed us spectacularly. And again, the EC was supposed to protect us from a tyrannical president. It didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![DeadTreasSecretaries](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deadtreassecretaries/32/4817_2.png) [@DeadTreasSecretaries](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DeadTreasSecretaries)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2020, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/217 "2020-09-17T01:08:02Z")
> [@Red\_Wiggler](#): > > Ending the EC may also lead to a boom in electoral participation as hundreds of thousands of dispirited Republicans in California and tens of thousands of Democrats in Alabama find new reasons for casting a presidential ballot. Why should voters in ten states determine our head of state when we could meaningfully involve voters in all 50? I think this is a really important aspect of elections and one of the biggest problems with the EC. Not only is it important to bring more people in to the democratic process, I think democracy works better the more voters political parties have to be concerned with losing. If we had a national popular vote, both parties would need policies that appealed to every swing vote rather than not having to be accountable to most of them. As a random example, the wildfires are going to have a reduced effect on the election because it’s a foregone conclusion that west coast states are going to vote for Biden. If this exact story had happened in the rust belt, the campaigns would be rushing out to those areas for photo ops, everyone would be arguing about who would run FEMA better and depending on how Trump responded to the situation and how Biden was able to criticize him for it, it would actually affect the election. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2020, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/218 "2020-09-17T02:01:25Z")
> [@Red\_Wiggler](#): > > There will always be terrible suggestions, RJ, (I probably made some unpopular ones in there myself) but I’d like someone to answer my simple and direct question first. If I may suggest something, then, I don’t think the US Constitution gets too many things wrong. The EC is a terrible idea and the Second Amendment is obviously a lot of trouble, but for the most part the rest of it is “people should be free and have a say in things and laws should matter” and it would work fine if people cared about it. The day they don’t, it doesn’t matter how the details work. ---
**Author:** ![Red\_Wiggler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/red_wiggler/32/13190_2.png) [@Red\_Wiggler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Red_Wiggler)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2020, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/219 "2020-09-17T14:16:06Z")
The EC is a pretty big one, though. And history may yet prove that a big mistake was made in creating an executive branch and a poorly representative bi-cameral legislature. Well, maybe not a mistake exactly but maybe a form of government that has been surpassed in effectiveness by other western democracies. I understand the arguments about federalism that will be certainly be tossed by some as a rebuttal but I think that’s another concept that has largely outlived its usefulness. ---
**Author:** ![YamatoTwinkie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/cc9497/32.png) [@YamatoTwinkie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YamatoTwinkie)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2020, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262/220 "2020-09-17T17:40:02Z")
> [@Red\_Wiggler](#): > > I understand the arguments about federalism that will be certainly be tossed by some as a rebuttal but I think that’s another concept that has largely outlived its usefulness. This is a pretty fair take, and I pretty much agree with it. Crazy hypothetical scenario: far-right groups in europe and russia completely take over, establish a new nazi empire over much of the continent. The US, Canada, South Korea, Japan, and China decide that their best hope in countering this threat is banding together and establishing the Pacific Partnership (PP) as a new mega-nation, with a flag with five equal stars representing the 5 former countries (now states). China wants this new nation to be governed strictly by popular vote to elect all leadership positions. There is no way the US will agree to this, and the US and Canada and Japan counter with “majority of states rules.” China will not accept this either, as it would leave them powerless against a bloc of those three states. The whole experiment looks like it is about to crumble, but eventually everyone hammers out a compromise with a bicameral legislature that made up of one house selected by the population at large (mostly controlled by China) and a second house with a single representative elected from each state. All legislation needs to pass both houses, guaranteeing that all future laws will be acceptable to both China and at least a majority of the other states. When it comes down to selecting a prime minister - again no agreement can be reached, for the same issues as the above (China wants a direct popular vote, but nobody else does). Again, a compromise is made by assigning each state the value of their total representatives from both houses in the legislature, and allowing each state to vote as one block. This system ends up so that China has about half the votes, and the other 4 states have the other half. It was a tough fight, but the new PP nation prevails in the upcoming world war. Peace ensues for the next 200 years, during which time everyone in the PP starts speaking one language, inter-state tensions are reduced and people start having new things to argue over than simple state rivalry. The prime minister position changes hands multiple times over history, neither being controlled by China or the other states for long. Political parties form that are no longer clearly cut across state borders. After a particularly contentious election in which a majority-Chinese-backed candidate for prime minister lost, somebody on a message board from China starts complaining about the “unfairness” of the prime leadership election mechanics. A vote from China is worth proportionally less than all the others! It’s not democratic! It’s ridiculous math! Someone else suspects that this objection may just be 90% sour grapes, points to the five equal stars on the flag (not one big one for China’s population and smaller for the rest), and the fact that that’s just how the PP was constructed, with full agreement from all parties at the time, with 200 years of history behind it, and elections for prime minister rarely deviate much from the popular vote anyway. Sure, it may not be ideal _now_, but its far from the most pressing issue in need of fixing, and from a practical matter its just going to be almost impossible to get the other 4 states to agree to a constitutional change at this point, so instead of continuing to charge at this one windmill, why not work within the system to tweak it towards the goal? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/electoral-college-v-popular-vote-how-big-is-too-big/920262.md?page=12)