I’m in the “I don’t see how Obama can’t get at least 270 electoral votes” camp, but I’m not as convinced that Romney can’t squeak out a popular vote “victory.” How would the Republicans handle it?
I can see Romney making some joke along the lines of “Now I know how Al Gore feels” (probably followed by some Democrats replying, “The difference is, Obama was elected, while Bush was appointed”), but the “official Republican response” would almost certainly have to be, “Obama was elected, and we’ll live with that.”
About half of them say he’s not a legitimate president anyway. It would make no practical difference. Maybe “Obama lost the popular vote” would take some steam away from Bitherism, but it occupies the same kind of mindspace.
If Obama wins the electoral vote, he wins the presidency. But if he loses the popular vote, that probably means the Dems loose big in The House, since that more accurately reflects the popular vote.
Bush-Gore was about the recount in Florida, not about what happens if there is a split between the electoral votes and popular votes. Whoever wins the electoral vote wins the election. That part is Constitutionally cut and dried.
Right, there have been several presidents who took office without winning the popular vote. John Quincy Adams was elected by the House of Representatives in 1824, and Hayes, Harrison, and George W. Bush all lost the popular vote. That’s not a Constitutional crisis and that’s not what made the 2000 election so bizarre and contentious. If it happened this year and Obama won I expect Republicans would make some noises about reforming or abolishing the electoral college, but by the time the 2016 presidential cycle rolled around they would surely forget about it- especially if they felt the electoral map was favorable to them.
Easy answer…Obama becomes President and Romney doesn’t. Why all this weird and convoluted conspiracy theory stuff?
The only practical effect would be the Republicans would say that Obama doesn’t have a mandate, which as Chefguy states is pretty meaningless. Other than that, possibly Romney considers another run in 4 years I suppose…or, maybe Ryan thinks seriously about taking his shot at the top spot then.
I’m a Republican. My reaction would be “Obama won the presidency.” Both guys are campaigning under the current rules. Whoever wins by those rules, wins fair and square. The popular vote, by itself, isn’t relevant. If it was, both guys would be running different campaigns, and then who knows what the outcome would be?
I’ve heard some conservatives say that Clinton didn’t really “win” the 1992 election because he didn’t get a majority of the votes. But nobody argued he wasn’t elected President.
Which is why I can’t figure out why all the media are making such a big deal about the national polls all of a sudden being close. They’re meaningless in terms of deciding the presidency. They are relevant to keeping viewers interested so I guess that is the real reason.
States don’t vote in vacuums, though. The winner of the national popular vote is going to win the electoral vote unless it’s a very close election. A candidate isn’t going to suddenly become five points more popular in Ohio without moving the needles elsewhere.