NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
Every election.
The winner of the electoral college has the broadest base of support nationwide.
look at the facts...the 2004 election as an example because it is clear cut.
Bush only had 3 million more votes than Kerry...a 2.5% difference.
BUT...Bush received 286 Electoral Votes compared to Kerry's 251.
Look at the map...Bush had the much wider base of support nationwide.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Now let's look at an election where the winner of the electoral college is not the winner of the popular vote...the 2000 election.
Al Gore won the popular vote by 450,000 votes over Bush...a difference of .5%.
But Bush had a significantly wider base of support.
Bush won 30 states, Gore 20 + DC.
Look at the map:
.
.
.
.
..
.
And there you have it.
That is how the electoral college protects the smaller less populated states from being overwhelmed by the larger more populated states in the Federal system.
Checks and balances.
Really? Looks to me, in that second map, like Vermont, Rhode Island, Hawaii, Delaware, New Hampshire, Maine all got overwhelmed
by the electoral college trumping the popular vote.
Look again and see how wrong you are!
Tiny little New Hampshire decided the 2000 election.
Those 4 electoral votes is what separated Bush 271 / Gore 266 from Gore 270 / Bush 267.
Just like I said...the electoral college protects the smaller less populous states...welcome to the Federal system.
Nonsense. New Hampshire's 4 electoral votes were canceled out by Rhode Island's 4 electoral votes.