FairVote - Vague Values

Vague Values

The Electoral College system not only removes the voice of a majority of the country, but in the end distorts the will of voters. George Edwards III explains, “There is typically a substantial disparity in almost all elections between the national popular vote a candidate receives and that candidate’s percentage of the electoral vote. In the election of 1860, although Stephen A. Douglas was second in popular votes, he was fourth in the Electoral College. Although he won 74 percent as many popular votes as were cast for Abraham Lincoln, his electoral vote was just 6.7 percent of Lincoln’s. Douglas’s popular vote was 162 percent of John C. Breckinridge’s, yet he received only 16.7 percent as many electoral votes as Breckinridge. And Douglas’s popular vote exceeded John Bell’s by more than two times, but Bell had three times as many votes in the Electoral College.” (George C. Edwards III, Why the Electoral College is Bad for America)

Electoral Replacements

Electoral Tie

Favorite Son Effect

A Few States Wins

Constitutional Residence

State Size

Special Interests

Power of State Legislatures

Unlucky Luck

Ignoring Your Vote

More Options

Electoral College Table of Contents



Home. > Presidential Elections Reform > Resources > Electoral College > How the Electoral College works today > Little Known Facts > Vague Values
	Vague Values The Electoral College system not only removes the voice of a majority of the country, but in the end distorts the will of voters. George Edwards III explains, “There is typically a substantial disparity in almost all elections between the national popular vote a candidate receives and that candidate’s percentage of the electoral vote. In the election of 1860, although Stephen A. Douglas was second in popular votes, he was fourth in the Electoral College. Although he won 74 percent as many popular votes as were cast for Abraham Lincoln, his electoral vote was just 6.7 percent of Lincoln’s. Douglas’s popular vote was 162 percent of John C. Breckinridge’s, yet he received only 16.7 percent as many electoral votes as Breckinridge. And Douglas’s popular vote exceeded John Bell’s by more than two times, but Bell had three times as many votes in the Electoral College.” (George C. Edwards III, Why the Electoral College is Bad for America) Electoral Replacements Electoral Tie Favorite Son Effect A Few States Wins Constitutional Residence State Size Special Interests Power of State Legislatures Unlucky Luck Ignoring Your Vote More Options Electoral College Table of Contents	June 3rd 2007 Bringing democracy to presidential voting Raleigh News & Observer Political Science professor, Clyde Frazier, makes a strong case in favor of the national popular vote plan. May 27th 2007 A Plan to Make Each Vote Count Durham Herald-Sun Guest columnist Lee Mortimer explains how the North Carolina Senate has taken a move in the right direction by passing the National Popular Vote plan. May 25th 2007 Our unfinished Constitution Los Angeles Times Writer David Stewart puts the Electoral College in historical perspective and details the problems created by the current system, while praising NPV as an "ingenious strategy" for overcoming them. May 18th 2007 Time to graduate from Electoral College Boston Herald Citing broad support among elected officials, this Boston Herland columnist praises the National Popular Vote legislation in Massachusetts and beyond. May 16th 2007 Our View: Electoral vote change would be good for the state and its people Fayetteville Observer The Fayetteville Observer backs the national popular vote plan as a means to make North Carolina in presidential elections, without amending the Constitution. [ Previous ] [ Next ]