Understanding the Electoral College and Popular Vote Discrepancies

It is a common misconception that the Electoral College is a mechanism capable of acting independently of the popular vote. This article aims to clarify the relationship between the Electoral College and the popular vote, providing historical context and an analysis of why the Electoral College often reflects the popular vote.

Historical Context of Discrepancies

The United States has seen five instances where the Electoral College and the popular vote diverged. The most recent notable example was the 2000 election, where Al Gore, who won the popular vote by 543,816 votes, lost the electoral vote to George W. Bush. Another instance was in 2016, when Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 2.4 million votes but lost the electoral vote to Donald Trump. These discrepancies have fueled discussions and calls for electoral reform.

The Mechanism of the Electoral College

The Electoral College is a system in which electors from each state cast votes for the president. These electors are typically recommended by political parties and usually follow the popular vote within their state. However, there have been instances where individual electors, known as faithless electors, have voted against the popular vote. This can happen, but it is extremely rare and has never changed the outcome of an election.

For example, in 2016 there were seven faithless electors who voted for someone other than the candidate supported by the popular vote in their state. While these votes were demonstrative of individual electors acting independently, they were not enough to alter the electoral college vote results, which remained 306 to 232 in favor of Donald Trump.

Legality and Loyalism Among Electors

Most state laws require electors to vote for the candidate who won the popular vote in their state. Even electors who are not legally bound are typically long-time party loyalists who are unlikely to deviate from their party's candidate. Radical groups advocating for electors to vote for a different candidate in the event of a party victory have no significant impact. For instance, some groups pushed Republican electors to vote for a different Republican candidate in 2024, but the chances of this happening are virtually zero.

The Role of the House of Representatives in Contingent Elections

The House of Representatives plays a crucial role in resolving ties in the electoral college through a contingent election. If the electoral vote ends in a tie, the House of Representatives, with each state receiving one vote, selects the president. Given the current political landscape, the Republican-majority House is likely to favor the Republican candidate, regardless of the popular vote.

For example, in 2020, the Republican-controlled House had a significant advantage, controlling 27 states outright and having a majority in the state caucuses. If a contingent election were to occur in 2025, the Republican candidate would likely win, even if the majority of voters preferred a different outcome.

Conclusion: Ensuring Fair Representation

The Electoral College system is designed to ensure that smaller states have a say in the election of the president. It is argued that a national popular vote might disregard the interests of these smaller states. However, in practice, the electoral college typically reflects the popular vote, especially in modern times where the influence of individual electors voting against the popular vote is minimal.

The system is complex and historically rooted, but it aims to balance the interests of different regions and states, ensuring that the president represents a broad spectrum of the American population.