THAT DARN ELECTORAL COLLEGE!
Really makes NPR mad; For some reason it hurts Democrats; Can’t have that!
The complaint, part of a drumbeat by the usual suspects, is that because Hillary Clinton may have eked out one percent more in the popular vote than Trump (roughly, 48% v 47%) , still not a majority of those voting, she should be President. Under our electoral college system, Trump won with 305 electoral votes to Hillary’s 233. (All 2016 results are still pending state by state canvasing). The NPR story is titled:
Shades Of 2000? Clinton Surpasses Trump In Popular Vote Tally
The author writes of lament over the electoral college. In doing so stilted time frames are used. Instead of referring to the last 16 years, why not refer to the last 24 years offering the symmetry of reference to a generation? It would also be more objective to give a little less sympathetic spin to complainants by instead of referring to “popular vote” using the more accurate and descriptive term “plurality choice.”
Why? We suspect that as regards the slightly expanded time line they might lose some sympathy for the cause because that would mean mentioning the elections of 1992 and 1996 where the “Clinton team” received, by the complainants presumed standard of fairness, an inordinate amount of electoral votes compared to his “popular vote” total.
In 1992 Clinton received only 43% of the popular vote but 69% (370) of the electoral votes. George H W Bush’s received 37.4% of the popular vote that election, a difference of 5.6% compared to Clinton, but it garnered him only 168 electoral votes. A less than 6% difference in the “popular vote” but less than half of the electoral votes Clinton received for his 43% popular vote performance. There is also the matter someone who in 1992 received nearly 19% of the popular vote, Ross Perot, received none.
The situation was basically repeated in 1996. Clinton again received less than a majority of those voting, at 49.2% and Dole received 40.7%. But Clinton received 379 electoral votes and Dole 159. A “popular vote” difference of 8.5% under Clinton gets Dole only about 42% of Clinton’s electoral vote tally.
Bill Clinton was never a popular vote president as in majority of popular vote. In both elections more people did not vote for him than did. He was never more than a plurality president.
So if the complainants were really concerned with “majority rules” (not something we endorse under our constitutional republic) or having a true “popular vote” president they should call for that and not lament that Hillary was not the winner when she did not receive a majority while maybe 1% more than Trump. By the way, had there been a run off of the top two in 1992, it is not at all certain that Bill Clinton would have been elected and therefore the question might include — Hillary who?
R Mall with DLH
