Each time a candidate wins a majority of Electoral votes but loses the national popular vote, many Americans wonder if changes should be made. When not given much thought… it appears to be a valid question.
Related: Justice Ginsberg – Not a Fan of the Electoral College But Its a Dream If You Think it’s Changing
This scenario occurred again in the 2016 Presidential election when Hillary Clinton received almost three million more national votes than Donald Trump. With that large of a difference in votes, many Democrats made what they believed to be a strong argument that Hillary Clinton deserved to serve as President – and said the Electoral College should be replaced with a National Popular Vote, including NH Senators Shaheen and Hassan.
On the other hand… Donald Trump won more states, and therefore a majority of electoral votes: 306 – 232, which is far more than the 270 electoral votes needed to win.
So which is better? A picture says a thousand words.
Here’s the vote breakdown of the 2016 Electoral Map by County. Trump won the red counties, Clinton the blue:
It’s clear which candidate a majority of America wanted to represent them – and that was the result.
Our Founding Fathers were brilliant in their ability to foresee and protect against a small number of highly populated regions controlling and imposing their will on the rest of the nation.
H/T: Mark
