There has been, over the course of this election, much wailing, gnashing of teeth and rending of garments over the past year or so with regard to polling. We are now, of course, a much more sophisticated sort of people, unwilling to allow minor fluctuations in polls bother us. For example, in today's DailyKos poll, where Obama was up by six points yesterday yet is only up by 5 points today -- I know everyone remains cool as a cucumber regarding this poll, yet also motivated to work hard in the next five days to achieve victory.
So I know I am preaching to the choir here. I'm okay with that. I just want to take this moment to combine my four loves: being a politics geek, being a math nerd, asking myself questions and then answering them (Rumsfeld-style), and drawing crude pictures with MS Paint.
What do national presidential election polls tell us?
They tell us which candidate would win the election if the election were held at this very moment and the population at large voted exactly like the random sample and presidential elections were decided by the popular vote.
Is that how presidential elections work?
No.
Well then, how do presidential elections work?
As many of us already know, presidents are elected by the Electoral College.
Well then, what is an Electoral College?
The Electoral College is a group of people who actually cast the ballots for president, based on the way that their particular state voted and how many electoral votes their state has.
How do you know how many electoral votes a state has?
Each state gets a certain number of electoral votes based on that state's number of Senate and House seats. Each state gets two Senate seats even if they are just some crap state like Wyoming or Alaska (I'm just kidding Wyoming and Alaska -- you know I love you). Each state also gets at least one House seat, even if they waste it on someone like Dennis Rehberg (R-MT). That means that you're guaranteed at least 3 electoral votes, even if you're South Dakota. Since the number of House seats is determined by the population of the state, more populous states have more House seats and thus more electoral votes.
So if you win a state, you win all their electoral votes?
Most of the time. But a couple of states split their electoral votes based on congressional district. So you win two electoral votes for winning the state, plus you win in each congressional district you won in. Only Maine and Nebraska do this, and they barely count as states anyway.
How many Electoral Votes are there total?
- This number makes websites like FiveThirtyEight.com seem much more clever.
How many Electoral Votes do you need to win?
Half of 538 to tie, and one more to win. Half of 538 is 269, plus one is 270. This number makes websites like 270towin.com seem much more clever.
How many states do you have to win to get to 270 electoral votes?
I'm glad you asked. There are some states, like California and New York, which have a lot of people and therefore a lot of electoral votes. As a result, the top 11 states have more than half the electoral votes.
State | | Electoral Votes |
California | | 55 |
Texas | | 34 |
New York | | 31 |
Florida | | 27 |
Illinois | | 21 |
Pennsylvania | | 21 |
Ohio | | 20 |
Michigan | | 17 |
Georgia | | 15 |
North Carolina | | 15 |
New Jersey | | 15 |
Total | | 271 |
So what does that mean? That you could win the presidency with just 11 states?
Yeah.
But what about states like Tennessee? Oregon? Wisconsin?
If the eleven states above all vote for you, you don't need any of the other 39 states, or the District of Columbia, for that matter. They can all get bent.
So wait a minute. You mean to tell me that someone can win the presidency even if they don't get one single vote from 80% of the states in this country?
It probably wouldn't happen in a million years, but... yep.
Well that's stupid but I guess it's no big deal, because they'd still have to get half the people in the country. They'd just all be concentrated into 11 states. Right?
Wrong. They would only have to win HALF of the voters in each of those 11 states (plus one in each state).
So based on population in each of the top 11 states, and assuming an equal rate of turnout in each state, what percentage of the vote would a candidate need to get in order to win?
Assuming a constant level of turnout in each state, a candidate winning each of the top eleven states by the barest minimum and receiving no votes in any other state could win the electoral vote 271 to 267 with a popular vote of 28.2%
Are you kidding me? Someone could win 72.8% of the popular vote and still lose the election?
Theoretically. But in reality, such a result would likely cause riots and/or revolution. Electors in the electoral college would likely be under a lot of pressure to heed the will of the vast majority of Americans. It would only take one elector to change his or her mind to make the vote a tie and send it to state delegations, or two electors to award the presidency to the clear winner of the popular vote.
So if this would never happen in a million years, and the results would just be overturned even if it DID ever happen, then why mention it?
John McCain has recently been gaining in the national polls. Now, most people here know better than to worry about such things. But just in case, I thought I would mention that John McCain is increasing his lead in small states without many electoral votes, mostly in the South, and all of them states he was already winning anyway. In other words, the tightening in the polls is for the most part not reflecting a change in the electoral vote. As far as the electoral college is concerned, it doesn't matter if McCain wins Mississippi, Utah, and Alaska with 51% of the vote or 99% of the vote.
PS
Here is a picture of a cat who isn't worried as long as you Get Out the Vote.
And here is a picture of a McCain/Palin hybrid Camo-Moose.