Electoral College

Subterms

    Latest story

    113 Shares104 Views

    Trump Is On Track to Win the Popular Vote

    by

    President-elect Donald J. Trump has already sealed a comfortable majority in the Electoral College. But he is also on course to do something he didn’t do in his first successful campaign for the White House: win the popular vote.The latest count suggests Mr. Trump will win more votes nationally in Tuesday’s election than his defeated rival, Vice President Kamala Harris, making him the first Republican to prevail in the popular vote in 20 years.Though votes were still being counted in some states, as of Thursday morning Mr. Trump had received more than 72.6 million votes, against around 68 million for Ms. Harris, a gap of around 4.6 million votes.The last Republican presidential candidate to win more votes than his opponent was former President George W. Bush in 2004, when he won re-election against John F. Kerry. The last Republican before him to do so was George H.W. Bush, the sitting vice president who defeated Michael Dukakis in 1988.The tally is a further measure of the scale of Mr. Trump’s win and another blow to Democrats. The consensus among pollsters before Election Day was that while Mr. Trump and Ms. Harris would run neck and neck in the Electoral College votes that decide the presidency, Ms. Harris would likely gain more votes overall.The assumption was partly based on recent elections. In 2000, George W. Bush lost the popular vote to Democrat Al Gore, but prevailed in the Electoral College. In the 2016 election, Mr. Trump defeated Hillary Clinton, but some Democrats took comfort in the fact that she had gained nearly three million more votes nationally than he did. More

    More stories

    • 113 Shares143 Views

      in Elections

      The Polls Are Close. The Results Might Not Be.

      by

      These two things are true about the presidential race: The polls currently show Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald J. Trump effectively tied. And close polls do not necessarily mean there will be a close result.This may feel counterintuitive, but the fact is that we are just a very normal polling error away from either candidate landing a decisive victory, especially in the Electoral College.This is a point my colleague Nate Cohn has made regularly in his election race updates over the last few weeks. But it bears repeating, because a lopsided result when there is an expectation of only razor-thin margins could further fan distrust in the polls and in the electoral process itself.“You can have a close election in the popular vote and somebody could break 315 Electoral College votes, which will not look close,” said Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion. “Or you could get a popular vote that is five points” apart, he added, “which is, by today’s standards, a landslide — a word no one has used this year.”Since 1998, election polls in presidential, House, Senate and governor’s races have diverged from the final vote tally by an average of six percentage points, according to an analysis from FiveThirtyEight. But in the 2022 midterm elections, that average error was 4.8 points, making it the most accurate polling cycle in the last quarter of a century. If polls were off this year, in either direction, by the same margin, the winning candidate would score a decisive victory.Based on where the polling averages stood on Monday, if the polls are underestimating Ms. Harris by 4.8 points in each of the seven swing states, she would win every one of them, and a total of 319 electoral votes, compared with only 219 for Mr. Trump. If those same polls underestimate Mr. Trump by the same margin, he would win all the battleground states, for a total of 312 electoral votes. More

    • 88 Shares161 Views

      in Elections

      What to Know About the Electoral College

      by

      “This is a very unique and bespoke system that I think nobody would create again today,” one expert said.Voters are already casting ballots for local offices, state legislators, governors, every member of the U.S. House and one-third of the U.S. Senate as Election Day nears.They are also choosing the next president but with a twist: Americans will actually select the electors, who will, in turn, elect Kamala Harris or Donald J. Trump, and their running mates.Yes, there are really two elections: one in which voters cast their ballots, and a second in which the electoral votes are cast and counted. Or, in other words, the winner of the most votes nationally is not assured victory.This is the way it has been done for more than 200 years, and it is likely to endure, even though a majority of Americans would prefer to have the winner of the most votes nationally rise to the presidency.What is the Electoral College?The Electoral College is made up of 538 elected members, one for each U.S. senator and U.S. representative, plus three for Washington, D.C.A presidential candidate needs to win a simple majority of them (270) to win the White House. The electors meet and cast votes for president and vice president in mid-December.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 75 Shares131 Views

      in Elections

      A Brief History of Messy Elections

      by

      Three times the results were disputed after the votes were in.This article is part of A Kid’s Guide to the Election, a collection of stories about the 2024 presidential election for readers ages 8 to 14, written and produced by The New York Times for Kids. This section is published in The Times’s print edition on the last Sunday of every month.America is the world’s oldest democracy. And part of why it has worked for so long is that people have faith that its elections are fair and honest. But not every election has gone smoothly. In the more than two centuries that we’ve been electing presidents, there have been a handful of elections in which people disputed the results.1876: A divided nationAbout a decade after the Civil War ended, America was still deeply divided between North and South. The 1876 election, between Samuel Tilden, the Democrat, and Rutherford B. Hayes, the Republican, came down to three Southern states where the results were disputed. Neither candidate had a majority of the Electoral College without those three states. So Congress appointed a committee to decide, and a deal was struck: Hayes would become president. But in exchange, the federal government would ease control over the Southern states that had been part of the Confederacy.2000: A 537-vote winThe 2000 election was very, very close. The Democratic candidate, Al Gore, won more votes across the country than his competitor, George W. Bush. But he didn’t have a majority in the Electoral College. It all came down to a single state, Florida, where Bush had a very slim lead. Gore went to court to challenge the vote counts in several counties there. But after a 36-day legal battle, the Supreme Court voted 5 to 4 to end the recounts. That left Bush with just 537 more votes in Florida, which meant that he won the Electoral College and the presidency. After that, Gore conceded. “I accept the finality of this outcome,” he said.2020: A capitol riotIn 2020, Joe Biden beat Donald Trump by seven million votes nationwide and won the Electoral College. But Trump wouldn’t accept the loss. He filed many lawsuits and pressured state officials, the Justice Department and his own vice president to help switch the results to him. It didn’t work. On Jan. 6, 2021, Trump told supporters to march to the Capitol, where Congress was counting the Electoral College votes. His supporters stormed the Capitol, and many people were hurt. Eventually, the police cleared the mob out, and Congress declared Biden the winner. More

    • 113 Shares113 Views

      in Elections

      So … How Does the Electoral College Work, Again?

      by

      It’s weird. It’s confusing. It’s how we elect the president.This article is part of A Kid’s Guide to the Election, a collection of stories about the 2024 presidential election for readers ages 8 to 14, written and produced by The New York Times for Kids. This section is published in The Times’s print edition on the last Sunday of every month.Every four years, there’s one thing everybody is talking about: the Electoral College. It’s not a school, despite what it sounds like. It’s the unique way that the United States elects its presidents. And if we’re honest, it’s pretty confusing. Here’s a breakdown of how that process works.When your school elects a class president, the math is simple: The kid who gets the most votes wins. The presidential election is more complicated. When people cast their ballots, their votes won’t go straight to Kamala Harris or Donald Trump. Instead, they go through the Electoral College, a system in which people who represent different states elect the president.So what is the Electoral College, specifically? It’s a group of hundreds of people called electors who speak for voters in their state. They are usually people involved with politics, like activists or volunteers. You can sort of think of them like team captains who speak for their fellow Pennsylvanians, Coloradans, Wisconsinites and so on. Each state has a different number of electors, and each elector gets one electoral vote.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 38 Shares113 Views

      in Elections

      Play: Election-Night Bingo

      by

      Listen up for these terms as the votes roll in. Find them on the board to be the night’s big winner.This article is part of A Kid’s Guide to the Election, a collection of stories about the 2024 presidential election for readers ages 8 to 14, written and produced by The New York Times for Kids. This section is published in The Times’s print edition on the last Sunday of every month.After months and months and months of hearing about it, the election is finally here! Every four years, millions of Americans cast their ballots for president. Then, they wait and watch for the results on election night. It’s exciting! But also kind of … a lot.The news is a jumble of numbers, some very intense maps and a bunch of politics wonks talking a mile a minute about “exit polls” and “returns.” Not the most kid-friendly introduction to participatory democracy. But like most things, the more kids understand what’s going on, the more interesting it can be.That’s where this game comes in. Think of it as a mash-up of bingo and a language scavenger hunt. LINGO!InstructionsPrint out the bingo board and the definitions of the terms on it. Skim the terms to familiarize yourself.Set a timer for 30 minutes and settle in for an evening of election excitement.Anytime you read or hear one of phrases from the board, check it off. Check your printout (or scroll below) to read the explanation, too!We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares96 Views

      in Elections

      Joseph J. Ellis: The Ideals of the Founders Are on the Ballot

      by

      The jury remains out on the verdict of the American electorate. While historians are virtually omniscient at predicting the past, we are not much better than most observers at predicting the future.Two predictions are, however, reasonably obvious: first, that Donald Trump will struggle to accept the verdict if he loses; second, that Kamala Harris will almost certainly win the popular vote, but could lose the election because of that strange American contraption called the Electoral College.More broadly, a longstanding American dilemma is on the ballot. Are a majority of American voters prepared to accept and even embrace the fact that we are a multiracial society — in effect, that Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream has become reality? Ms. Harris’s supporters are betting that we are. Mr. Trump’s supporters are betting that we are not.The founding fathers did not think about the popular vote and electoral college vote the way we do. Yet that disjunction looms over this election.There is also a gender dimension to our American dilemma that further complicates the outcome. Do we fully and finally believe the last six words of the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag, “with liberty and justice for all”? Even more than Barack Obama, Ms. Harris puts that question to the acid test. And polls will not provide a reliable answer, because many white and Black men will not reveal their deeper motives, even to themselves. Namely, that they cannot vote for a woman.As we prepare to celebrate the 250th anniversary of American independence, the idea of human equality pronounced at the American founding will be front and center. We will be bombarded with Jefferson’s lyrical tribute to human equality. But we will also hear about the reality of racial and gender prejudice embraced by several prominent founders and the vast majority of American citizenry over which they presided.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares197 Views

      in Elections

      G.O.P. Lawmaker Voices Support for Giving North Carolina’s Electors to Trump

      by

      Representative Andy Harris, Republican of Maryland, appeared to voice support for a plan for North Carolina’s Republican-controlled Legislature to award former President Donald J. Trump the swing state’s electoral votes, according to video of a conservative gathering on Thursday that was posted on social media.Mr. Harris, the chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, later walked back his comments in a statement on Friday, saying that the “theoretical conversation has been taken out of context” and that “every legal vote should be counted.”His comments, reported earlier on Friday by Politico, came in an exchange with Ivan Raiklin, a lawyer and a supporter of former President Donald J. Trump who promoted a plan in 2020 to pressure former Vice President Mike Pence not to certify electors from several disputed swing states.Mr. Harris appeared to use the hurricane-damaged region of western North Carolina as a rationale for the plan, falsely saying that the voters there had been “disenfranchised.” The North Carolina State Board of Elections approved several emergency measures this month to ensure that voters in the region who were reeling from the effects of Hurricane Helene could still cast ballots.Early in-person voting in the 13 most-affected counties has fared well so far, despite challenges presented by storm recovery efforts. Voters in those counties account for 8 percent of the state’s registered voters, and they have accounted for nearly the same percentage of accepted votes in the state so far. “It looks like things are improving,” said Christopher A. Cooper, a political science professor at Western Carolina University in Cullowhee, N.C.Representative Patrick McHenry, Republican of North Carolina, told reporters on Friday that “it makes no sense whatsoever to prejudge the election outcome,” according to Politico.“That is a misinformed view of what is happening on the ground in North Carolina,” Mr. McHenry said of Mr. Harris. “Bless his heart.” More

    • 138 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      En caso de crisis electoral, esto es lo que debes saber

      by

      En 2020, cuando Donald Trump cuestionó los resultados de las elecciones, los tribunales rechazaron decisivamente sus intentos una y otra vez. En 2024, el poder judicial podría ser incapaz de salvar nuestra democracia.Los renegados ya no son principiantes. Han pasado los últimos cuatro años haciéndose profesionales, diseñando meticulosamente una estrategia en múltiples frentes —legislaturas estatales, el Congreso, poderes ejecutivos y jueces electos— para anular cualquier elección reñida.Los nuevos desafíos tendrán lugar en foros que han purgado cada vez más a los funcionarios que anteponen el país al partido. Podrían ocurrir en un contexto de márgenes electorales muy estrechos en los estados clave de tendencia electoral incierta, lo que significa que cualquier impugnación exitosa podría cambiar potencialmente las elecciones.Disponemos de unas pocas semanas para comprender estos desafíos y así poder estar alerta contra ellos.En primer lugar, en los tribunales ya se han presentado docenas de demandas. En Pensilvania se ha iniciado un litigio sobre si están permitidas las papeletas de voto por correo sin fecha y si se pueden permitir las boletas provisionales. Stephen Miller, exasesor de Trump, presentó una demanda en Arizona alegando que los jueces deberían tener la capacidad de rechazar los resultados de las elecciones.Muchos estados han cambiado recientemente su forma de votar. Incluso una modificación menor podría dar lugar a impugnaciones legales, y algunas invitan afirmativamente al caos.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More