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	September 2nd 2007 How to divvy up state's electoral votes? San Diego Union Tribune A primer on the rival methods of allocating electoral votes in California, featuring analysis from FairVote. August 30th 2007 Stealing the 2008 Vote TomPaine.com If you thought Tom DeLay's Texas gerrymandering scam in 2003 was bad, just wait. Now partisans are seeking to steal the 2008 presidential election. August 27th 2007 A simple reform: Count all votes St. Petersburg Times Special correspondent Martin Dyckman explains the partisan motivation in the recent move in California to award electoral votes by congressional district. August 27th 2007 Americans Would Get Rid of Electoral College Angus Reid Global Monitor According to Rasmussen Reports, only 30% of Americans feel we should preserve the Electoral College. Historically the public has favored a national popular vote by margins of 70% - 80%. August 24th 2007 Deformed Reform Slate Magazine Maryland state senator Jamie Raskin explains the partisan gamesmanship behind the proposed Electoral College "reform" of allocating votes by congressional district. [ Previous ] [ Next ]