Using either the district plan or the proportional plan to reform the electoral College would NOT ensure that the winner of the popular vote become president.
get a share of the electoral vote. (nova net) (grad point)
The Electoral College itself does not encourage any particular style of campaigning.What matters is that the individual STATES typically allot electoral votes on a "winner take all" basis. (Some, such as Maine, allot electoral votes on a congressional district-by-district basis.)So, since California was clearly going to go to the Democrats and Texas to the Republicans, neither presidential candidate campaigned there. Both candidates focused their attentions on the "battleground" states that could have voted either way.If California were to allot electoral votes on a district-by-district basis, then instead of Obama getting all of California's electoral votes, Obama would have gotten about 60% of them, and McCain would have received the rest. (In California, the big cities vote overwhelmingly Democrat, while the central valley and mountain districts are strongly Republican.)
The 3 major defects in the electoral College system are 1. the winner of the popular vote is not guarenteed the presidency 2. electors are not required to vote in accord with the popular vote 3. any election might have to be decided in the House of Reps.
Many Americans think that when they cast their ballot, they are voting for their chosen candidate for a better government. In actuality they are selecting groups of electors in the electoral college. A candidate must receive an absolute majority of electoral votes (currently 270) to win the Presidency.The election for President and Vice President is not a direct election by United States citizens. Citizens vote for electors, representing a state, who are the authorized constitutional participants in a presidential election.
Andrew Jackson lost the election of 1824 even though he received the largest number of popular votes and electoral votes. In the 1824 presidential election an individual needed to receive at least 131 electoral votes out of the 261 total electoral votes. Andrew Jackson received 99 electoral votes, John Quincy Adams received 84 electoral votes, William Crawford received 41 electoral votes, and Henry Clay received 37 electoral votes. The popular vote totals were Andrew Jackson 151,271, John Adams 113,122, Henry Clay 47,531, and William Crawford 40,856. Since no candidate received the required majority of 131 electoral votes, the president was elected by the U.S. House of Representatives in accordance with the Twelfth Amendment of the United States Constitution. John Q. Adams won the election in the House of Representatives.
You mean delegate votes, not electoral votes. The quick answer is that the Democrats have more total delegates appointed to attend their conventions than the Republicans do. In either case, the candidate must have 50 percent plus 1 vote to be nominated.
You might be asking one of two questions, either about the electoral college, or the electoral system. Please be more specific.
The Electoral College itself does not encourage any particular style of campaigning.What matters is that the individual STATES typically allot electoral votes on a "winner take all" basis. (Some, such as Maine, allot electoral votes on a congressional district-by-district basis.)So, since California was clearly going to go to the Democrats and Texas to the Republicans, neither presidential candidate campaigned there. Both candidates focused their attentions on the "battleground" states that could have voted either way.If California were to allot electoral votes on a district-by-district basis, then instead of Obama getting all of California's electoral votes, Obama would have gotten about 60% of them, and McCain would have received the rest. (In California, the big cities vote overwhelmingly Democrat, while the central valley and mountain districts are strongly Republican.)
Each state has electoral votes equal to the total of the 2 representative the state has in the U.S. Senate plus the number of representative the state has in the U.S. House of Representatives. The District of Columbia gets 3 electoral votes. Therefore, the total number of electoral votes is 538 - 100 (senators) + 435 (representatives) +3 (for DC).
John Quincy Adams, in 1824.
if somthing is proportional is will either be Multiplying or Diving
US Grant won the 1868 US presidential election as a Republican by a comfortable margin with 214 Electoral College votes to Democrat Seymour's 60 Electoral College votes. In the 1872 elections, Grant won reelection with 286 Electoral College votes. The independent Democrat candidate had 42 votes.The US Congress had no role in either election.
It is a graph of a proportional relationship if it is either: a straight lie through the origin, ora rectangular hyperbola.
It depends on what type of nurse, district nurse, nursery nurse. But i would recommend psychology, biology and maybe chemistry. I am going either, Eccles college, manchester, pendleton or trafford college.
It can be either a straight line through the origin or a hyperbola.
Either a straight line through the origin or a hyperbola.
Yes, the allocation of electoral votes in a state can be changed, but it would require a change in the state's laws or constitution. Some states already allocate their electoral votes proportionally based on the popular vote, while others have a winner-take-all system. Any change would require the state legislature or voters to pass new legislation or a constitutional amendment.
It doesn't work that way. The electoral votes are the final vote for president. The popular vote will either go for one party deciding who the electoral votes go to.