Unless the polls are wildly impolitic -- and the McCain push does not seem to dream they are -- Democrat Barack Obama will disseminate Michigan and together all 17 of our Electoral College votes. It's winner-take-all, even if the conquer is by just one vote. That's how it goes under our organization -- lone in the (small d)emocratic earth -- of choosing a federal leader. Every mission else, the entrant with the most votes wins. In the United States, it's the applicant with the most electoral votes, which for each grandeur are brother to its representatives in the U.S. House benefit two senators, so for Michigan, 15 profit two.
That makes it possible, and still it has happened four times, most recently in 2000, for a prospect to bested the popular vote and carry off the election. I know, we are a republic, and the structure assures that the states of this junction choose the head of the federal government. But what about prevalent sense? Most votes wins, end of story. Isn't that how you mutate every opinion count? The Electoral College, which isn't even a actual school, is why McCain has been worrisome to achievement the country like an abacus, campaigning in states that would tote up to victory while ignoring his millions of supporters in states such as New York and California that, get a kick out of Michigan, appear to be a hook for Obama.
This is un-(small d)emocratic and has got to be a bad turn to other Republican candidates who might get a increase from a McCain visit. This election, similar to so many before, is booming to be firm in a handful of states, including Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin, where the electoral votes will be left "in play" sort out up to Nov. 4. In 2004, President George W. Bush and challenger John Kerry all in more than 80% of their span and gain in just nine states. (Note to the future: Maybe Michigan voters should over talking to pollsters.
Keep 'em guessing; gets us more attention, and we in reality could use it.) Supporters of the Electoral College for example that it keeps the most jam-packed areas of the wilderness from dominating every election, that puny states wouldn't significance much in a order accepted election. Who's to say? Bush subdue Kerry by about 3 million votes in 2004, 62 million to 59 million.
Could there not have been a absolute of 3 million kith and kin in uneven Bush states such as Texas and Indiana who figured why perturb showing up to opt for Kerry? Conversely, a cadre to Kerry of just 60,000 votes in passkey wigwag states could have given him the White House without the hot vote. Abolishing the Electoral College would force a cumbersome vacillate in the U.S. Constitution.
But there's a better character that could be implemented before we go through this again in 2012. Check out NationalPopularVote.Com. These folks have a system that involves legislatures agreeing to warp their state's electoral votes for the victor of the nationalist predominating vote. The states have such discretion, and four -- Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey and Maryland -- already have passed bills to do it.
But their legislation won't grab punch until states representing an electoral seniority -- 270 of the 538 electoral votes -- also have passed such laws. Michigan does not even have a folding money pending, but the arise is ready for some go-ahead legislator to aim for in the additional hearing next year. Yes, it could plan that the seeker who lost Michigan gets the state's electoral votes, but once you discern who won the sought-after vote, the Electoral College becomes a punctilio anyway. The society have spoken. Now, too many will not be heard.
RON DZWONKOWSKI is senior editor of the Free Press column page. Contact him at or 313-222-6635.
With respect to post: read
