# Popular Vs. Electoral votes? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 8, 2000, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331 "2000-11-08T16:50:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![handy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5a626/32.png) [@handy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handy)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2000, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/1 "2000-11-08T16:50:43Z")
What’s this? Gore has more votes than Bush, so he won? Nope, whoever has the most Electoral votes wins. Now Im mad cause the people have spoken, G has to most votes, but may not win. That electoral votes determine who wins has been around a long time. Why doesn’t the guy with the most votes win? ---
**Author:** ![zev\_steinhardt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/97f17d/32.png) [@zev\_steinhardt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zev_steinhardt)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2000, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/2 "2000-11-08T16:55:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by handy \* > \*\* > What’s this? Gore has more votes than Bush, so he won? Nope, whoever has the most Electoral votes wins. Now Im mad cause the people have spoken, G has to most votes, but may not win. That electoral votes determine who wins has been around a long time. Why doesn’t the guy with the most votes win? \*\* Because that’s the way the Founding Fathers wanted it. Zev Steinhardt ---
**Author:** ![toadspittle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c0e974/32.png) [@toadspittle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/toadspittle)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2000, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/3 "2000-11-08T16:56:11Z")
Because that’s the way they made this country. ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2000, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/4 "2000-11-08T16:59:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by handy \* > \*\* > What’s this? Gore has more votes than Bush, so he won? Nope, whoever has the most Electoral votes wins. Now Im mad cause the people have spoken, G has to most votes, but may not win. That electoral votes determine who wins has been around a long time. Why doesn’t the guy with the most votes win? \*\* Simple-minded people see no rational in having an “Electoral College.” But our Founding Fathers were not simple-minded folks. Do your homework, and find out _why_ we have an Electoral College. ---
**Author:** ![Mauve\_Dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ad7895/32.png) [@Mauve\_Dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mauve_Dog)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2000, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/5 "2000-11-08T17:01:24Z")
Or, to put it another way, we are a Republic, not a Democracy. The ‘will of the people’ is not necessarily what drives the government. More like ‘the will of the people’s representatives.’ ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2000, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/6 "2000-11-08T17:06:35Z")
Face it, Handy. This country was never supposed to be a pure democracy. The electoral college is designed specifically to prevent a few large, heavily populated states from overwhelming many smaller, less-populated states. Some people (mostly in California and New York) are calling for eliminating the EC, but any such ammendment would fail because the small states know that they’d be committing political suicide if they passed it. ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2000, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/7 "2000-11-08T17:10:51Z")
I’d better say that I had no intention of jumping on a “Let’s make fun of Handy” bandwagon. I was just trying to make my point. Plus, I only got about two hours of sleep because I was so nervous about the election. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![pldennison](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/9fc29f/32.png) [@pldennison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pldennison)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2000, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/8 "2000-11-08T17:13:13Z")
According to CNN, the popular vote as of 12:05 pm ET today was Gore 49%, Bush . . . 49%. A majority of only about 250,000 votes out of 96 **million** cast. I would hardly call that a mandate from the American people. ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2000, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/9 "2000-11-08T18:06:46Z")
There _ **is** _ a reason we have an electoral college, and it is rooted in political philosophies the Founding Fathers held. Without getting into too much detail, the reason we have an electoral college is because it acts as a buffer between the spontaneous desires and whims of the people vs. the serious responsibilities held by the government. You see, our Founding Fathers were very fearful of two things: 1. Monarchies 2. Democracies They thought _ **both** _ were evil. And that’s one of the reasons you and I aren’t able to _directly_ vote for federal candidates. BTW: I fully agree with our Founding Fathers on this issue; democracies are _ **just** _ as bad as monarchies. In fact, I think they’re worse. Suffice to say, if you live in the U.S.A., you do _ **not** _ live in a “democracy”; you live in a constitutional republic. And thank God for that. ---
**Author:** ![brad\_d](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@brad\_d](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brad_d)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2000, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/10 "2000-11-08T19:38:30Z")
The question “why do we have that &(\*#$@# electoral college” is really two-fold: 1 - Why do we have winner-take-all votes districted by states? 2 - Why do we vote for “electors” rather than the candidates themselves? Don’t forget: we could very well have #1 without #2. In fact, we basically do. Electors in about half the states (a cite was given in some previous thread) are _legally bound_ by state law to vote in accordance with their pledge. Electors in the other half _may_ vote for someone else, but it so rarely happens that it’s just not that big of a concern. My opinion: #2 is so transparent that it’s not an issue. #1 _alone_ allows a candidate to win the popular vote, yet lose the election. This is far from transparent, and to me is the far more relevant aspect of the Electoral College system we have. At the risk of putting words in **handy** ’s mouth, I think _that_ (point #1) was what his question was about. ---
**Author:** ![bibliophage](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bibliophage/32/7615_2.png) [@bibliophage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bibliophage)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2000, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/11 "2000-11-08T21:31:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by pldennison \* > **Gore 49%, Bush . . . 49%. A majority of only about 250,000 votes out of 96 million cast** Just to pick nits, it’s not a majority, but a plurality. If it isn’t over 50%, it isn’t a majority. ---
**Author:** ![BobT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e8cbc/32.png) [@BobT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobT)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2000, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/12 "2000-11-08T21:42:54Z")
Picking more nits, Gore has a plurality with 49%, but the 250,000 or so votes isn’t the plurality. It’s just the margin or the difference. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2000, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/13 "2000-11-09T00:04:23Z")
Just the same, if the outcome remains as it is expected, with Gore receiving “the difference” as you put it, Bush will go down in history as the Roger Maris of presidential politics, with a big fat \*\*\*\*\* next to his name. Gore will be the shadow president, and will have a bully pulpit to say “I told you so”. I predict Bush will be remembered as the least influential President in American history. ---
**Author:** ![KeithB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/48db29/32.png) [@KeithB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KeithB)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2000, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/14 "2000-11-09T00:17:14Z")
Are the laws forcing elector’s to vote for the selected candidate constitutional? It seems that if a state mandated term limit (For senators and congresspeople) are unconstitutional, than any state-imposed limits on the elector’s are, too. Or, is just that it has not been challenged yet. ---
**Author:** ![2sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/2/e47774/32.png) [@2sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/2sense)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2000, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/15 "2000-11-09T00:20:42Z")
\*\*Crafter\_Man \*\*: My homework has shown me that the FF ( Founding Fathers or Fist Fuckers- take your pick ) were a bunch of elitist pricks. You can find my cite in [this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?postid=859934#post859934) where I am arguing that the EC is a big old steamy pile of shit. ---
**Author:** ![2sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/2/e47774/32.png) [@2sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/2sense)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2000, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/16 "2000-11-09T00:26:03Z")
I did a search on “electoral college” and found a bunch of threads. I didn’t notice that this was in GQ. Apologies to **Chronos** and **manny** if that wasn’t up to snuff. ---
**Author:** ![brad\_d](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@brad\_d](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brad_d)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2000, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/17 "2000-11-09T00:29:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KeithB \* > \*\*Are the laws forcing elector’s to vote for the selected candidate constitutional? It seems that if a state mandated term limit (For senators and congresspeople) are unconstitutional, than any state-imposed limits on the elector’s are, too. > > Or, is just that it has not been challenged yet. \*\* I did some hunting, and dredged up [this site]([http://www.nara.gov/fedreg/elctcoll/faq.html#wrong](http://www.nara.gov/fedreg/elctcoll/faq.html#wrong) vote), hosted by the National Archives and Records Administration. It pretty much says that the constitutionality of such laws has not been “specifically ruled on” by the Supreme Court. It also says that 24 states plus the District of Columbia have laws requiring electors to vote their pledge. ---
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2000, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/18 "2000-11-09T02:15:38Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by brad\_d \* > \*\*The question "why do we have that &(_#$@# electoral college" is really two-fold: > > 1 - Why do we have winner-take-all votes districted by states? > > 2 - Why do we vote for “electors” rather than the candidates themselves? > > Don’t forget: we could very well have #1 without #2. In fact, we basically do. Electors in about half the states (a cite was given in some previous thread) are _legally bound_ by state law to vote in accordance with their pledge. Electors in the other half _may_ vote for someone else, but it so rarely happens that it’s just not that big of a concern. > \*\* Michigan is one of the states that have legally bound electors, but this provision only applies to the _first vote_ of the EC (at least in Michigan). However, according to CNN last night (early this morning, that is), there have been instances of electors voting contrary to their mandates. The states were powerless to effect any punishment, and it was (and is) Congress’ decision whether to accept the vote (made by certain traitors). Typically electors are picked for their loyalty. I can’t picture any trading sides on the first vote anyway. As for the winner-take-all approach, Maine is an example of a state that does NOT have winner take all. It awards electors based on district, much like I expressed wishes that Michigan would, in another thread a few days ago. For the anti-EC crowd, the EC really _is_ a good thing, even in this modern day and age. As is so often pointed out, it prevents states like CA and NY from dominating everyone else. Our nation is _not_ founded on the basis of a democracy; we are a Federation (uh, “federal” anyone?) of 50 pseudo-independent states. The purpose of the federal government is _NOT_ to represent “we the people” but the _states_ (which is composed of the people). I for one don’t want leftist Californians dictating policy within my state (which sadly swung to Gore last night) – California has nothing to do with Michigan! For the same reasons cited above, I would _love_ to see MI follow Maine’s lead and allow districting the vote. The greatest part of Michigan (per area) is NOT Detroit, but yet the state allows all 18 votes (i.e., 16 districts) to go to one party or the other based solely on the mood of high-population Detroit area, which is nothing like the rest of the state. I’d like to express the same desire for other states, but I cannot in good conscience. Since I am a “citizen” (flame me) of Michigan, other states’ concerns aren’t my business. Oh yeah, THANK YOU NADER!!! ---
**Author:** ![ubermensch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/bcef8e/32.png) [@ubermensch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ubermensch)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2000, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/19 "2000-11-09T06:36:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Balthisar \* > \*\*For the anti-EC crowd, the EC really _is_ a good thing, even in this modern day and age. As is so often pointed out, it prevents states like CA and NY from dominating everyone else. Our nation is _not_ founded on the basis of a democracy; we are a Federation (uh, “federal” anyone?) of 50 pseudo-independent states. The purpose of the federal government is _NOT_ to represent “we the people” but the _states_ (which is composed of the people). I for one don’t want leftist Californians dictating policy within my state (which sadly swung to Gore last night) – California has nothing to do with Michigan! > \*\* personally, i like the idea that we directly elect presidents…but the ‘leftist’ californians could not dictate policy within michigan… that’s why we have governers, to dictate policy within the states, within the union… california has nothing to do with michigan, except that the resident’s opinions should be equal, no matter what state they live in. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2000, 6:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331/20 "2000-11-09T06:42:21Z")
> [@](#): > > For the same reasons cited above, I would _love_ to see MI follow Maine’s lead and allow districting the vote. The greatest part of Michigan (per area) is NOT Detroit, but yet the state allows all 18 votes (i.e., 16 districts) to go to one party or the other based solely on the mood of high-population Detroit area, which is nothing like the rest of the state. I agree 100%; all states should adopt proportional electoral vote allocation. Could a Supreme court case be made against the constitutionality of “winner take all” laws? If they were declared unconstitutional, it would go a long way toward rectifying the electoral college system, without resorting to amending the constitution to abolish the EC altogether. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/popular-vs-electoral-votes/40331.md?page=2)