The Electoral College, explained

Summary

The video script discusses the Electoral College system in the US, explaining its origin, how it operates, and its impact on the presidential elections. It highlights the discrepancies in voting power among states and the historical reasons behind its establishment, including the 'three-fifths clause'. The script also points out the shifts in political dynamics and the ongoing debate over the fairness and necessity of the Electoral College, with a focus on its current influence in favoring certain states and demographics.

Takeaways

• 🗳️ The U.S. presidential election is determined by the Electoral College, not the national popular vote.
• 🔄 National polls are less important than swing states, which can determine the election outcome.
• 🏛 The Electoral College is based on the representation system in Congress, with each state having a number of representatives based on population and two senators.
• 📊 States with smaller populations have more influence per voter in the Electoral College due to the allocation of delegates.
• 🏳️‍🔴 The Electoral College has historically led to instances where a candidate wins the presidency without the popular vote.
• 📊 The system creates discrepancies in voting power among states, with some states' votes being worth more than others.
• 🔄 Swing states, like Florida, receive significant attention from candidates due to their potential to swing the election.
• 📉 Non-swing states are often overlooked during campaigns, despite having large populations.
• 🔄 The Electoral College's influence has shifted over time, reflecting demographic and political changes.
• 🏛 The Electoral College was designed to balance power among states, with historical compromises like the 'three-fifths clause'.
• 🔄 Attempts to abolish the Electoral College have been blocked by those who benefit from it, reflecting ongoing political dynamics.

Q & A

Why do national polls not determine the winner of the U.S. presidential election?

National polls do not determine the winner because the U.S. uses the Electoral College system, where the president is elected by state delegates rather than the national popular vote.

What is the Electoral College and how does it work?

The Electoral College is a system where each U.S. state has a number of delegates based on its population and representation in Congress, and the president is elected by the majority of these delegates rather than the overall popular vote.

Why does the Electoral College system sometimes result in a candidate winning the presidency without the popular vote?

This can happen because a candidate can win a few populous states by a small margin, thereby securing a majority of electoral votes, even if they lose the national popular vote.

How does the allocation of electoral votes per state differ between populous and less populous states?

Each state gets the same number of electoral votes as their Congressional representatives, plus two for each senator. This means populous states like Texas have many more electoral votes per person than less populous states like Vermont.

What is a 'swing state' and why are they important in U.S. presidential elections?

A 'swing state' is a state where the election outcome is uncertain and can go to either party. They are important because candidates focus their campaigns on these states to secure the necessary electoral votes to win the presidency.

How does the winner-take-all system in most states affect the importance of individual votes?

The winner-take-all system means that the candidate who gets the most votes in a state, even by a small margin, receives all of the state's electoral votes, which can make individual votes in some states more influential than in others.

What was the 'three-fifths clause' and how did it influence the Electoral College?

The 'three-fifths clause' was a compromise in the U.S. Constitution that counted enslaved people as 3/5 of a person for the purpose of determining a state's population and, consequently, its electoral votes, giving Southern states more representation.

How has the Electoral College system affected the political representation of different racial groups throughout U.S. history?

The Electoral College has historically benefited certain groups, such as White Southerners, by allowing for overrepresentation despite discriminatory practices that prevented many from voting, such as poll taxes and acts of violence.

Why have attempts to abolish the Electoral College failed in the past?

Attempts to abolish the Electoral College have failed because those who benefit most from the system, such as Southern senators in the past, have blocked changes that would reduce their influence.

How does the current Electoral College system benefit certain states and political parties?

The current system benefits states with a lot of electoral votes for fewer people, which tend to be whiter and less diverse, and often Republican strongholds. This has led to recent Republican presidents winning the Electoral College without the popular vote.

What is the argument for keeping the Electoral College as it is?

The argument for keeping the Electoral College is that it gives certain regions and populations more power in choosing the president, and its defenders believe it serves as a political safeguard for their interests.

Outlines

00:00

🗳️ The Irrelevance of National Polls and Importance of Swing States

This paragraph explains that despite the common focus on national polls during presidential elections, they do not determine the winner. Instead, the Electoral College system is highlighted as the true decider of the US presidency. The Electoral College is composed of delegates from each state, and the actual vote of the American people is for their state's delegates. The system has led to instances where a candidate wins the presidency without the national popular vote, as seen in recent history. The paragraph also touches on the unpopularity of the Electoral College among Americans and attempts by both political parties to abolish it, questioning why it still exists and who benefits from it.

05:06

🏛️ The Electoral College's Historical and Demographic Biases

The second paragraph delves into the historical background and demographic implications of the Electoral College. It describes how the system is based on representation in Congress, with each state having a number of representatives proportional to its population and two senators. This system results in discrepancies in the influence of individual votes across states. The paragraph also discusses the 'three-fifths clause' from the Constitution, which historically gave Southern states more electoral power despite the lack of voting rights for enslaved people. It further explains how even after the abolition of slavery and the granting of voting rights to Black Americans, discriminatory practices continued to overrepresent certain populations in the Electoral College. The paragraph concludes by noting the current beneficiaries of the Electoral College system and the political shifts that have led to its continued existence, despite calls for its replacement with a popular vote.

Keywords

💡National Polls

National polls refer to surveys that measure the popularity of presidential candidates across the entire United States. In the context of the video, it emphasizes that despite national polls indicating a lead for a candidate, they are not the determining factor in who wins the presidency, as the Electoral College system is the actual method of election.

💡Swing States

Swing states, also known as battleground states, are states where the election's outcome is uncertain and can swing towards either political party. The video highlights the importance of swing states in the Electoral College system, where candidates focus their campaigns because these states can determine the election's winner.

💡Electoral College

The Electoral College is the system used in the United States to elect the president and vice president. It consists of a group of representatives, or electors, from each state who cast votes on behalf of their state. The video explains that the Electoral College, rather than the popular vote, decides the presidential election, leading to potential discrepancies in the influence of voters from different states.

💡Popular Vote

The popular vote is the total number of votes cast for a candidate in an election. The video script discusses how a candidate can win the presidency without winning the popular vote, which has happened in the past, underscoring the difference between the popular vote and the Electoral College system.

💡Representation in Congress

Representation in Congress refers to the allocation of seats in the House of Representatives based on state population and the two senators each state is guaranteed, regardless of population size. The video uses this concept to explain the basis of the Electoral College, where the number of electors a state has is tied to its congressional representation.

💡Discrepancies in Representation

Discrepancies in representation highlight the unequal influence of voters from different states due to the Electoral College system. The video points out that the value of a vote can vary significantly from one state to another, making some votes more influential than others.

💡270 Electoral Votes

To win the presidency, a candidate must secure at least 270 out of the total 538 electoral votes. The video script uses this threshold to illustrate the strategic importance of winning swing states, as they can provide the decisive votes needed to reach this majority.

💡Winner-Takes-All

The winner-takes-all system is a rule in which the candidate who wins the most votes in a state receives all of that state's electoral votes. The video explains that this rule amplifies the significance of swing states and diminishes the impact of votes in states where one party has a dominant majority.

💡Three-Fifths Clause

The three-fifths clause was a compromise in the U.S. Constitution that counted enslaved people as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of determining a state's population and, consequently, its tax base and number of representatives. The video script uses this historical context to show how the Electoral College has been used to shift political power.

💡Overrepresentation

Overrepresentation in the Electoral College refers to states having a disproportionate number of electoral votes relative to their population. The video discusses how certain states, particularly those that are less populated and whiter, have more electoral power per voter, which can influence the outcome of the election.

💡Political Safeguards

Political safeguards are measures that protect the interests of a particular group or region within the political system. The video script cites a quote from a senator highlighting the Electoral College as a safeguard for the South, illustrating how the system has been used to maintain political power for certain regions or demographic groups.

Highlights

National polls are misleading and do not determine the winner of the U.S. presidential election.

Swing states are crucial in U.S. elections as they can change the outcome due to their electoral votes.

The U.S. Electoral College system is unique and differs from the popular vote method used in most democracies.

Voters in the U.S. are actually voting for their state's delegates who will then vote for the president.

The occurrence of winning the presidency without the popular vote has happened twice in the past 20 years.

There is a significant majority of Americans who dislike the Electoral College system.

The Electoral College is based on representation in Congress, with each state having a different number of delegates.

The discrepancy in the Electoral College means that a voter's influence varies greatly between states.

A candidate needs 270 or more Electoral College votes to win the presidential election.

Most states award all their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the popular vote within the state, regardless of the margin.

Swing states receive more attention and influence in elections due to their potential to sway the outcome.

The Electoral College has historically shifted power between different groups of voters.

The 'three-fifths clause' was a compromise to count enslaved people in the population for electoral votes.

Attempts to abolish the Electoral College have been blocked in the past, often due to political self-interest.

The Electoral College benefits certain states with fewer but more influential electoral votes, often leaning Republican.

The push to replace the Electoral College with a popular vote is primarily led by Democrats who are currently at a disadvantage.

The Electoral College's defenders have always been those who benefit the most from it, and this has changed over time.

Transcripts

If you watch the news during a presidential election,

you’ll hear a lot of this:

“What do the national polls look like?”

“Hillary Clinton’s national lead…”

“Nationally, Joe Biden is currently ahead.”

But these national polls don’t actually tell you who’s going to win.

“Throw the national polls out the window, they don’t matter at all.

What matters are those swing states.”

Ah yes. The swing states.

Most democracies around the world elect their head of state with a popular vote:

So, whoever gets the most votes wins.

But in America we do it a little differently.

The US is the only country that picks its president

using something called the Electoral College.

It’s made up of delegates from each US state.

When Americans vote for president, what they’re actually voting for,

is who their state will vote for.

This is why, every so often, someone wins the presidency

without winning the popular vote.

That’s happened twice in just the past 20 years.

The majority of Americans do not like this system, and haven’t for a long time.

Both political parties have made attempts to get rid of it.

So why does the US still use the Electoral College?

And who actually benefits from it?

The Electoral College is based on how people are represented in Congress:

where each state has a number of representatives based on its population,

and every state also gets two senators.

So, for example, let’s look at Texas, which has a huge population,

and Vermont, which has a really small one.

Texas has 36 representatives in Congress. Vermont only gets one.

Representatives in both states each represent

roughly the same number of people.

In the Electoral College, a state gets the same number of delegates

as their Congressional representatives, plus two — for each senator.

So Texas has 38 electoral votes. Vermont has 3.

But this combination makes the number of people each delegate represents

way different between states:

In Texas, one electoral delegate represents three times the amount of people

as one in Vermont.

And that makes each individual person’s vote in Vermont a lot more influential.

The Electoral College creates discrepancies like this all over the country.

A voter in Wyoming is worth three and a half times as much as a voter in California.

The winner of the presidential election is the candidate who gets 270 or more

of these Electoral College votes.

These are the results of the 2016 election, by state.

You’re probably more familiar with this version of it: a map of red states, and blue states.

But this chart tells a different story. You can see that no state is actually all-red or all-blue.

But almost every state awards its electoral votes the same way:

The candidate who gets the most votes in a state, gets ALL its electoral votes.

If they win the state by 1%, they win 100% of the electoral votes.

In 2016, more than 4 million people voted for Donald Trump in California.

In fact, more people voted for him there than in any other state except for two.

But it didn’t matter. Hillary Clinton got more votes there,

so she got all 55 of its electoral votes.

Clinton never even campaigned in California. Polling showed she’d easily win the state.

Trump only visited Texas once; he knew he basically had that state’s electoral votes locked.

But they both visited Florida, 35 or more times.

That’s because Florida is usually a “swing state”:

Polls show that the vote there could swing to one party or another in nearly every election.

Trump only won it in 2016 by 100,000 votes, out of more than 9 million.

Swing states have changed over time, thanks to shifting demographics and political views.

And it’s states like these where presidential candidates

spend most of their time campaigning.

It also means these states have way more influence over the election than these ones.

A study found that voters in Michigan had 51 times the amount of influence on the 2016 election

as someone from a state like Utah.

Voters in states like California, or Missouri, mattered very little.

Swing states are where the election actually takes place.

They get the attention and the influence.

And they only exist because of the Electoral College.

It doesn’t seem very fair.

But the Electoral College has always shifted power

away from some people and towards others.

It’s how it was designed.

Back when there were just a few states, not 50,

they had to get all the states to agree on the Constitution.

One problem: The Northern states, which were largely anti-slavery,

wanted only free people to count in the population towards electoral votes.

Which they had more of.

The pro-slavery Southern states were worried that they would be constantly outvoted,

and wanted enslaved people to count in determining the population.

As a compromise, they settled on something called the “three-fifths clause.“

It established that an enslaved person would only count as 3/5 of a person.

In 1800, Pennsylvania, a northern state, and Virginia, a southern one,

had about the same number of free people living there.

But Virginia was also home to hundreds of thousands of enslaved people,

who had no freedom, let alone a vote,

and ended up with more votes in the Electoral College than Pennsylvania.

That year, those extra electoral votes gave the candidate from Virginia just enough to win.

Even after the US finally abolished slavery,

and eventually gave Black Americans the right to vote,

White Southern leaders found ways to keep them from voting,

like with discriminating laws like poll taxes, and acts of violence.

This meant they continued to have overrepresentation in the Electoral College

on behalf of a large population that couldn’t vote.

The first time Congress attempted to replace the Electoral College with a simple popular vote

was back in 1816.

But senators from Southern states blocked it,

saying it would be “deeply injurious” to them.

In 1969, Congress came even closer:

replacing the Electoral College had support in both parties,

and even passed the House.

But it was blocked again by Southern senators.

A senator from Alabama wrote,

“The Electoral College is one of the South’s few remaining political safeguards.

Let’s keep it.”

Why change a system that historically had, and still was benefiting White Southerners?

Today, the states that the Electoral College benefits have changed,

but it’s still making some voters more powerful than others.

If we look at the states with a lot of electoral votes, for not a lot of people,

and the states with a little electoral votes, for a lot of people,

these states are a lot whiter and less diverse than the rest of America.

And many of these states are Republican strongholds.

These tend to vote Democratic.

That’s one reason the two most recent Republican presidents

have won the Electoral College without winning the popular vote.

And since it’s currently Democrats that are primarily disadvantaged by the Electoral College,

they’re the ones leading the charge to replace it with a popular vote.

“Get rid of the Electoral College, and every vote counts.”

But as politics have changed, the people most critical of the Electoral College have, too.

In the 1948 presidential election, New York ended up being the major swing state.

A Congressman from Texas said, “I have no objection to the Negro in Harlem voting.

But I do resent the fact that his vote is worth a hundred times as much...

as the vote of a white man in Texas.”

Swing states change.

What doesn’t, is that the Electoral College gives certain people more power to pick the president.

And its biggest defenders have always been those who benefit the most from it.