I dont think getting a plurality as opposed to a majority is losing. This does however point out a possible flaw in a national popular vote. What would you do if no candidate received a majority? Would a plurality be enough to elect someone? Would you need a run-off? Would, as now, the House choose the president?
National Popular Vote
Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by Trotter, Sep 24, 2011.
Page 2 of 2
-
-
For once, I agree with you.
-
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite SupporterHow do you figure that Kennedy and Clinton lost the popular vote?
-
Totally incorrect - The small (population) States or Commonwealths wanted equal representation in Congress regardless if they were in the North or South - thus the Great Compromise of two houses: House by population, Senate to Represent the State
In 1960, Kennedy did NOT get a majority of the votes, and Henry Byrd did received some Electoral Votes
and in 1992, Clinton only received about 45% of the vote as Ross Perot received about 20 million votes. -
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Looks to me that Kennedy and Clinton both won the popular vote. They had more votes than any other candidate. Isn't that the definition of popularity? Note: Not getting more than 50% does not mean you 'lost' the popular vote.
John F. Kennedy (D)
Electoral 303
Popular 34,227,096
Richard M. Nixon (R)
Electoral 219
Popular 34,107,646
William J. Clinton (D)
Electoral 370
Popular 44,908,254
George Bush (R) (I)
Electoral 168
Popular 39,102,343 -
The OP is no so much about what constitutes the popular vote as the main discussion is about the Electoral College (which i still support)
So to discuss the popular vote itself - click here
Salty
PS ITL, just wondering why you did not include Russ Perot in your stats -
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite SupporterI simply copied-and-pasted the results that came up for 1992 at the link you provided. Perot was not listed.
-
From that website:
" Ross Perot received 19,741,065 votes "
17% of the vote is quite subnational.
Thats the problem with too many voters, not properly informed, unable to research all details -
Actually, 1/5th of the total voters for a third party candidate is quite impressive. Most do not even get into the double digits. Had Perot ran on the Republican ticket, he would easily have beaten Clinton.
Page 2 of 2