What's the largest popular vote possible without being elected President?

nm.

Jake Jones writes:

> . . . Texas was a slam dunk for Trump . . .

Well, not really. Texas was far from being the state with the largest percentage of the vote being for Trump. In Texas the vote was 52.43% for Trump and 43.32% for Clinton. As you can see, this isn’t anywhere close to its having the largest percentage going for Trump:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2016

Yeah, Texas is thought of as the archetypal red state not because it’s so red, but just because it’s so large, and because it’s at least red enough that it would never be the tipping point. That is to say, with the right candidates, Texas could go blue… but if that happens, then the Democratic candidate would also be winning big in enough other places that she would still win even without Texas.

Wyoming, say, is much redder than Texas, but nobody cares about a state with only three EVs.

[quote=“BeepKillBeep, post:3, topic:772370”]

About 78%. Fast forward to 6:30 seconds or so.

[/QUOTE] THis video directly answers he OP, although in percentages rather than absolute numbers. However, fast forward to 4:19 (6:30 is the total length of the video). https://youtu.be/7wC42HgLA4k?t=4m19s

Hypothetically you on need nine people to vote to elect a president. One vote in each of those nine states 1-0 and you have 273 evs.

Then assume 100% turnout in all other states for the other candidate. I’m sure a 99.99999% popular vote margin is possible.

Hypothetically you need 270 people to vote to elect a president, not 9. Yes, it might seem nitpicky, but then, electors voting their conscience, even a majority of them doing so, is a lot more plausible than an election with only one voter in an entire state.

Alternately, that failing, you need 26 people to vote to elect a president.

Yeah, but electors aren’t the popular vote.

Or, if we’re playing that game, going by Bush v. Gore precedent, you only need 9 people to vote for you (8, currently) :wink:

By a strictly legalistic interpretation, I suppose you could get 100% of the popular vote, with everyone voting, and still not get the Presidency if the electors select someone else. While 100% wouldn’t happen, there’s a very real situation where a candidate wins the popular vote in a landslide, and wins it in enough states to win the electoral vote also, but the electors vote for someone else, and that is that the candidate dies sometime before December whateverth that the electors vote on.

[quote=“BeepKillBeep, post:3, topic:772370”]

About 78%. Fast forward to 6:30 seconds or so.

[/QUOTE]

Huge errors!
First of all, a majority is not “half + 1” is is more than half. Think a majority of 101 voters.
Second, you don’t need 22% of the vote to win. You could win the Presidency with only NINE votes! One person votes for you in the 9 largest EV states and no one else votes. You will have 273 electoral votes.
In fact that is the answer to the OP’s question I believe. The number of the voters in the other 41 states (assume 100% turnout) - 9.

OR it could be reversed. It could be the number of voters inthese blue states - 39 (Maine and Nebraska complicates things)