On the night of November 6, 2012, there was a moment when President Barack Obama appeared to win reelection to the White House despite losing the popular vote. This was due to California not yet counting all its votes; ultimately, Obama surpassed Mitt Romney and won a majority of votes cast. A Republican who had endorsed Romney, Donald Trump, expressed anger at the electoral college system, calling it a “disaster for a democracy” and urging Americans to march on Washington. Four years later, Trump won the presidency through the electoral college despite losing the popular vote.
In the 2020 Election, Trump attempted to manipulate the electoral college once again but was unsuccessful. The election hinged on three states – Georgia, Arizona, and Wisconsin. Changing the way electoral votes are distributed in certain states has become a topic of discussion, with Trump endorsing a proposal in Nebraska that would allocate all five electoral votes to the overall winner, rather than splitting them based on congressional districts.
Historically, the electoral college was meant to be independent of the popular vote, but over time, most states aligned electors with the popular vote. Nebraska and Maine have unique systems for allocating electors. Implementing a similar distribution method nationally would yield different outcomes in past elections, with Trump potentially benefitting. The implications of changing the electoral college system raise questions about the balance between the popular vote and electoral vote.
As the discussion on electoral college reform continues, it remains to be seen how changes at the state level could impact the outcomes of future presidential elections. The complexities of the electoral college system highlight the ongoing debate over the role of this institution in our democratic process.
Read More Politics-news/” target=”_blank”>Politics News
