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	November 29th 2005 S.D. has little say in picking president ArgusLeader.com News article about FairVote's Who Picks the President report focuses on changes to make South Dakota voters a player in presidential elecitons. Runs on state Associated Press wire in several papers. November 14th 2005 Group questions Louisiana's influence The Louisiana Advocate FairVote's "Who Picks the President" report generates interest for Louisiana columnist. November 9th 2005 Primary reform good for Nebraska Lincoln Journal Star An editorial using FairVote's report Who Picks the President to underscore the importance of electoral college and primary schedule reform. November 1st 2005 The Shrinking Battleground Tom Paine.com FairVote's Chris Pearson and Ryan O'Donnell argue that the Electoral College has a wide range of negative consequences for American democracy. October 27th 2005 Parties should make direct election of president a priority Seattle Post-Intelligencer FairVote's Ryan O'Donnell argues that a genuine commitment to inclusion should impel both parties to think seriously about direct election for president. [ Previous ] [ Next ]