Will we see more EC winners who lose the PV?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 07:32:33 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  Will we see more EC winners who lose the PV?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Will we see more EC winners who lose the PV?  (Read 1414 times)
Sir Mohamed
MohamedChalid
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,468
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 20, 2018, 02:38:17 AM »

Over the next few decades, are we going to see more EC winners who lose the popular vote? It happend in 2000 and 2016 and I think it's happening again. If Trump wins reelection, the gap could even be wider than 2016. Up to 5-6 million votes. And here is the issue why I think it will continue to happen: The trend towards urbanization is going to continue (worldwide), more and more people will live in cities rather than rural areas. And the electoral votes these states again won't compensate this development properly, so that rural states get even more weight than they already have. The senate will be out of balance even further. And we know that this will solely benefit the GOP.

The chance that Dems lose the PV and win the EC is rather slim. It could have happened in 2004 by flipping OH, but I don't see that in the future.
Logged
Peanut
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,105
Costa Rica


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 20, 2018, 07:38:49 AM »

It could well happen in 2020. I don't think Trump winning the PV is likely.
Logged
Former President tack50
tack50
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,891
Spain


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 20, 2018, 12:49:07 PM »

Yeah, almost certainly. The question is whether there will be a Democrat who wins the EC but loses the PV I guess.

Thus far all such examples involve a Republican beating a Democrat even though said Democrat wins the popular vote: Trump beating Clinton, Bush beating Gore, Harrison beating Cleveland and Hayes beating Tilden.
Logged
darklordoftech
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,391
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 20, 2018, 03:30:22 PM »

It's interesting how similar 1876 and 2000 were and how similar 1888 and 2016 were.
Logged
Peanut
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,105
Costa Rica


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: November 20, 2018, 05:22:20 PM »

It's interesting how similar 1876 and 2000 were and how similar 1888 and 2016 were.

Just curious, why do you say 1888 and 2016 were similar? It sounds like an interesting comparison.
Logged
darklordoftech
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,391
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: November 20, 2018, 05:27:38 PM »

It's interesting how similar 1876 and 2000 were and how similar 1888 and 2016 were.

Just curious, why do you say 1888 and 2016 were similar? It sounds like an interesting comparison.
1876 was in dispute and ended with people feeling it was stolen while 1888 was undisputed.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,522
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: November 20, 2018, 06:51:43 PM »
« Edited: November 20, 2018, 07:00:01 PM by Skill and Chance »

Yeah, almost certainly. The question is whether there will be a Democrat who wins the EC but loses the PV I guess.

Thus far all such examples involve a Republican beating a Democrat even though said Democrat wins the popular vote: Trump beating Clinton, Bush beating Gore, Harrison beating Cleveland and Hayes beating Tilden.

JFK 1960 was probably a Dem EC win/PV loss, depending on how you allocate the votes cast in Alabama where electors were selected in a very complicated way.

Regarding the future, it could plausibly happen in the late 2020's/2030's if Texas and Georgia are just left of the nation and Republicans are getting 10%+ margins in many of the big Midwest states.  Also helps if Upstate NY/Downstate IL is a GOP +25 blowout by then and/or if Florida is GOP+5 or better.  The tied PV map would be something like this:




Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,522
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: November 20, 2018, 06:53:09 PM »

It's interesting how similar 1876 and 2000 were and how similar 1888 and 2016 were.

Just curious, why do you say 1888 and 2016 were similar? It sounds like an interesting comparison.
1876 was in dispute and ended with people feeling it was stolen while 1888 was undisputed.

Judging by 2018 vs. 2002, I don't really agree with this.  Outside of the Dem base, most voters got over 2000 very quickly. 
Logged
Sir Mohamed
MohamedChalid
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,468
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: November 21, 2018, 02:41:31 AM »

It's interesting how similar 1876 and 2000 were and how similar 1888 and 2016 were.

Just curious, why do you say 1888 and 2016 were similar? It sounds like an interesting comparison.
1876 was in dispute and ended with people feeling it was stolen while 1888 was undisputed.

1876 was also about FL, wasn't it?
Logged
darklordoftech
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,391
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: November 21, 2018, 03:03:36 AM »

It's interesting how similar 1876 and 2000 were and how similar 1888 and 2016 were.

Just curious, why do you say 1888 and 2016 were similar? It sounds like an interesting comparison.
1876 was in dispute and ended with people feeling it was stolen while 1888 was undisputed.

1876 was also about FL, wasn't it?
yes
Logged
completely dead account
Koorca Ton
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 367
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: November 21, 2018, 03:14:58 AM »

Definitely. There's a reason Dems took the House but not the Senate.

You don't need to win an entire state to take some seats back. The Democrats were able to turn each Republican state slightly more Democratic. Not enough to flip the entire state, but enough to flip some seats from some states. On the other hand, the DNC struggled in the Senate because they couldn't flip entire states from R to D.

Similarly, Hillary and Gore couldn't win the EC despite winning the PV for basically the same reasons. The two of them racked up large margins of victories in states they won and lost by razor thin margins in states they lost.

So I think it's possible we'll have another victory where someone loses the PV but wins the EC. Most likely a Republican, as Democrats' votes are generally highly concentrated in small but densely populated metropolitan areas. And the EC has shown us population doesn't matter in a national election, but rather the spread of votes overall. Trump had a larger spread of votes, but Hillary had more votes in general.
Logged
Orser67
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,947
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: November 21, 2018, 12:24:10 PM »

Definitely. It was basically a huge fluke that there were no winners-who-lost-the-PV between 1888 and 2000, and that fluke was caused largely by alternating periods of presidential dominance by the Democratic and Republican parties. Between 1900 and 1996, just five of 25 elections were decided by a popular vote margin of less than five points. Meanwhile, of the 17 presidential elections that have had a popular vote margin of five points or less, 4 were won by the loser of the popular vote. As long as presidential elections remain closely-contested going forward, I expect more popular vote losers to win the presidency.
Logged
Peanut
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,105
Costa Rica


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: November 21, 2018, 01:18:17 PM »

It's interesting how similar 1876 and 2000 were and how similar 1888 and 2016 were.

Just curious, why do you say 1888 and 2016 were similar? It sounds like an interesting comparison.
1876 was in dispute and ended with people feeling it was stolen while 1888 was undisputed.

1876 was also about FL, wasn't it?

Also LA and SC
Logged
kcguy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,031
Romania


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: November 21, 2018, 05:20:02 PM »

Take the number of Obama voters in 2012.  Multiply that number by 3.5%.  Subtract that number from Obama's total vote and add it to Romney's.

That would cost Obama the popular vote, but I think the only state that flips to the GOP would be Ohio.
Logged
darklordoftech
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,391
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: November 21, 2018, 06:24:47 PM »

I wonder how people would react if a Democrat won the EC but lost the PV.
Logged
Peanut
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,105
Costa Rica


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: November 21, 2018, 10:47:24 PM »

I wonder how people would react if a Democrat won the EC but lost the PV.

The Republicans would start complaining about us stealing the election, how we're just ridiculously unfair, and how we bused in Canadians to Pennsylvania.
Logged
Sir Mohamed
MohamedChalid
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,468
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: November 22, 2018, 03:16:46 AM »

I wonder how people would react if a Democrat won the EC but lost the PV.

The GOP would go crazy and demand to abolish the EC. Therefore I hope this happens once they have decent nominee. Not Trump, because he needs to get beaten at every level. No excuses.

It would have been so ironic if this happend in '04 to W by flipping OH.
Logged
Former President tack50
tack50
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,891
Spain


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: November 22, 2018, 03:51:57 PM »

Come to think about it, a nice scenario to think about:

Bush wins the 2000 election but loses the PV.
In 2004, Kerry wins the 2004 election but loses the PV by flipping Ohio
President Kerry is reelected in 2008 normally (wins PV and EC, say the recession happens later)
In 2012 Barack Obama narrowly beats Mitt Romney, but Romney actually wins the popular vote.
Finally in 2016 president Obama loses to Donald Trump, but Obama wins the PV.

Change the names if necessary, but would such an scenario be realistic and would there be a movement to abolish the EC if 4 of the last 5 elections ended with an EC/PV split, with the EC not particularly benefiting either party?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.045 seconds with 11 queries.