The popular vote and the electoral vote are two completely different things. The presidency is decided solely on who wins the electoral vote, and the popular vote is only good for giving us an idea of who is going to win the presidency.
The larger the state the more votes they have in the electoral college, so if a president can win the majority of the large states electoral votes and a few smaller states they can gain the majority they need to win the presidency. In fact, if a president only needs to win the votes for the 11 largest states and they can win the presidency without a vote from the other 39 states.
US Presidents are not elected by popular vote, they are elected by electoral votes, cast by the electors from each state and DC. The electors are elected by popular vote and pledge to vote for one particular candidate.
Most states use a winner-take-all method for choosing electors. The presidential candidate who wins the popular vote in a state wins all the electors which means he will get all the electoral votes of that state even if he wins by only onepopular vote. Therefore it is possible for a losing candidate to win by huge majorities in the states he wins and lose by tiny majorities in several large states and so lose the electoral vote and the election, but receive an overall majority of popular vote.
In fact one could theoretically win by winning by one vote in each of the eleven largest states and getting no votes at all in the other 39 states and DC.
This is possible because of the "winner take all" feature of the election. If a candidate wins a state by just one popular vote, he wins all of that state's electoral vote. So, a winning candidates can win by small majorities in enough states to with the electoral vote majority and lose really big in the states he loses and finish behind in the popular votes.
The president is not elected by total popular vote but by electors elected independently by popular vote from each state. Therefore the losing candidate can win huge majorities in the states he wins, but lose by narrow margins in the states he loses and so rack up a majority of popular votes but not a get a majority of electoral votes.
A candidate can win a popular vote by appealing to the state, but can lose a electoral vote by the electoral college deciding against him or her. the electoral college takes the popular votes and makes their vote, determining the new president. for example if Ohios popular vote was for Obama, the electorals would see that and would most likely pick Obama for their vote, but in the past the electorals have gone against the popular vote.
This can happen because of the winner-take-all allotment of electoral votes.
A candidate can win a state by a slim, say one-vote majority and get all of its electoral votes. Meanwhile his opponent might win 100% of the vote in some states and pile up a huge number of popular votes and still not get so many electoral votes ,
A president is elected by the electoral college, not by the people.
It is possible that a candidate could win the "national" popular vote total but lose the electoral vote total. However, the electoral vote of every state accurately reflects the popular vote within that state. A candidate could win the electoral votes in a large state such as California winning the state by a huge margin. However, the opposing candidate could win the electoral votes in other states because a majority of the voters in those states vote for the opposing candidate.
The candidate who receives the most electoral votes wins the presidency. It is possible to lose the popular vote but win the electoral vote to be elected president.
It is possible that a candidate could win the "national" popular vote total but lose the electoral vote total. However, the electoral vote of every state accurately reflects the popular vote within that state. A candidate could win the electoral votes in a large state such as California winning the state by a huge margin. However, the opposing candidate could win the electoral votes in other states because a majority of the voters in those states vote for the opposing candidate.
It is possible that a candidate could win the "national" popular vote total but lose the electoral vote total. However, the electoral vote of every state accurately reflects the popular vote within that state. A candidate could win the electoral votes in a large state such as California winning the state by a huge margin. However, the opposing candidate could win the electoral votes in other states because a majority of the voters in those states vote for the opposing candidate.
It is possible that a candidate could win the "national" popular vote total but lose the electoral vote total. However, the electoral vote of every state accurately reflects the popular vote within that state. A candidate could win the electoral votes in a large state such as California winning the state by a huge margin. However, the opposing candidate could win the electoral votes in other states because a majority of the voters in those states vote for the opposing candidate.
It is possible that a candidate could win the "national" popular vote total but lose the electoral vote total. However, the electoral vote of every state accurately reflects the popular vote within that state. A candidate could win the electoral votes in a large state such as California winning the state by a huge margin. However, the opposing candidate could win the electoral votes in other states because a majority of the voters in those states vote for the opposing candidate.
That happens because the electoral votes are not given in the same proportions as the popular votes received. Virtually every state uses the "winner-takes-all" method of appointing electors. If, for example, 48% of a state's popular votes are cast in favor of Candidate A, 47% support Candidate B, and 5% support Candidate C, Candidate A gets 100% of that state's electoral votes and Candidates B & C don't get any.The Electoral College casts the electoral votes. It is comprised of representatives of each state. While the popular vote is held to have an impact on the Electoral College's decisions on who to vote for, it is not illegal for the Electoral College to vote another way. In addition, not every state has the same amount of electoral votes. It is possible for more people total to vote for a president, but since they are so spread throughout the states, the Electoral Votes may end in another way.
That person was John Quincy Adams who was chosen as president in 1824 by the House of Representatives since no candidate received a majority of the electoral vote. Jackson actually won more popular votes and more electoral votes than did Adams.
All ten of Minnesota's electoral votes go to the Presidential candidate with the most popular votes in the state and his running mate.
Electoral votes in the Electoral College determine the President of the United States. The electors are elected by popular vote in each state and each candidate for elector swears in advance whom he will vote for.
The total of 538 Electoral College votes is determined by allocating 435 votes to the House of Representatives (each state receives a minimum of one), 100 votes to the Senate (two per state), and three votes to the District of Columbia. The purpose of the popular vote in the Electoral College system is to determine the outcome of the presidential election in each state. The candidate who wins the popular vote in a state typically receives all of that state's electoral votes.
It is possible that a candidate could win the "national" popular vote total but lose the electoral vote total. However, the electoral vote of every state accurately reflects the popular vote within that state. A candidate could win the electoral votes in a large state such as California winning the state by a huge margin. However, the opposing candidate could win the electoral votes in other states because a majority of the voters in those states vote for the opposing candidate.