What Is The Proper Response If Barack Obama Wins The Popular Vote And Loses The Electoral College?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

Strategists for both John McCain and Barack Obama are chewing over a hypothetical scenario wherein Barack Obama recieves millions more votes than John McCain, but, because of the distribution of votes in the electoral college, McCain would become the president. Shades of 2000, of course. The momentum to abolish the electoral college has abated in mainstream debates, and the Democratic Party, not wanting to look like sore-winner-losers, never took up the cause even though Al Gore received more votes than George W. Bush.

One Republican who has advised the McCain campaign thinks the country "can stand that sort of thing once every 100 years, but not twice in 8 years—especially with the Republicans winning every time."

Here's the thought experiment that gives rise to the scenario. As my colleague Ron Brownstein has pointed out, of the 29 states that President Bush won twice, Sen. Kerry received less than 43% of the vote in 21 of them.

In 2008, Democrats are outregistering Republicans. Their level of enthusiasm is much greater and probably will remain so through the election. Many more people identify as Democrats in 2008; in major deep blue states, Barack Obama will, if current trends hold, shatter turnout records.

John McCain will win a state like Mississippi, but it will certainly be by a much narrower margin that George W. Bush held over John Kerry. Think of a state like Georgia, where Obma will turn out potentially a 100,000 more black voters than John Kerry, or a state like Indiana, where Kerry recieved only four out of every ten votes.

By the same token, it is hard to imagine, although not impossible to conceive, that John McCain would be able to narrow President Bush's margins in many of the red Republican states. The Obama campaign will have the resources to narrow the gap in Texas by, say, 800,000 votes, and the McCain campaign and the Republican National Committee will be hard pressed to devote resources to a state they know they're going to win.



http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/06/some_thoughts_on_a_hypothetica.php

[Syrinx]

1. recount in Nevada!

:)

[madaboutharry]

2. My response will be:

Head in oven.

(Well, figuratively)

[AllentownJake]

3. Demand Recounts

but the constitution is the constitution and it isn't changing.

The small states will not vote for an amendment change because the electoral college over estimates some of their population and ensures that the candidates will pay attention to their issues.

[babylonsister]

4. Suspicion, especially after the debates. nt

[tekisui]

5. God Damn America?

We need to work hard to ensure a win by Electoral College.

[NotThisTime]

6. Don't wait til then GOTV!!!! Get out the vote in red states, blue & purple states!

[frogcycle]

7. I think the mcCain people are right

(and not just philosophically)

a replay of 2000 would not go down well. The whole thing in 2000 was about whether to recount; the fact that Gore won the pop vote was not really stressed. There is a lot more attention being paid now, what with the royal screwing the country has gotten from the right-wing crazies, and I think there'd be a lot of noise about it. But the law is what it is, and if the EC is not abolished before ther election, we could be in for a 3d bush term despite the popular vote. The cabal will most assuredly work on that strategy - they will find a way, if there is one, to stay in power. Anyone who thinks HRC was stubborn ain't seen nothing yet.

[izzie]

8. The cities will blow up

and they should

[doc03]

16. Why? We have been hearing the popular vote

doesn't count for the last several weeks. Those are the rules, if that is the way it goes down don't be whining they cheated.

[iamjoy]

24. Did Hillary Win The Popular Vote

It's hard to say because we aren't sure what to do with Michigan and how to count the the caucus results (which aren't verified). It wouldn't be fair to totally dismiss caucus results. Also, there were grassroots efforts in Michigan by Obama and Edwards to get their supporters to vote "uncommitted." So, we can really only estimate.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

It was very close, less than 1% any way you slice it.

Mind you, I don't say this to point out how the Democratic primary process was unfair to either candidate, but you can't compare this to a general election in which the results from the popular vote are more clear.

I personally don't like it when Obama supporters tell Hillary people things like "who cares about the popular vote" and "get over it" because those are the same things we have been told about 2000 and it is galling. I think it's more accurate to say that because of the way our primaries are run, there is no clear winner based on popular vote. I'd say they tied and the tie breaker is the delegate counts, which Obama won.

Also, look at their plans for America. Hillary's goals and Obama's goals are very similar - the differences are more in style than substance. This is not to say there aren't some concrete differences, but they are minor compared to what McSame has planned.

[papau]

26. yes

[Clark2008]

27. No.

The caucus states aren't counted in her estimate because there is no way to count them.

[papau]

25. Well said - Hillary won popular vote (counting Mich) and that got DU saying "those are the rules"

[SparkyMac]

17. You mean Rodney King will lead us ?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18. Rodney King Argued For Restraint

"Can't we all get along?"

[Boz]

9. Then he will have lost, Al Gore didn't win the popular vote and have the presidency stolen based on

the popular vote, Al Gore had the presidency stolen by the SCOTUS on Electoral votes being overturned.

It wont be that close this time, ITS ALL ABOUT GOTV, the fight isnt in November, THE FIGHT IS NOW.

Obama has to win the Electoral votes or he loses to McCain, it is that cut and dried.

[WeDidIt]

10. That would be the best case scneario for the GOP

because McCain is losing HUGE this year.

[dems_rightnow]

11. Mourn

And that's about it.

Just like the primary was a fight for delegates, not popular vote, the general election is a fight for electors. Obama knows he needs electoral votes. He won't be trying to "change the rules" after the game, as some seemed to want to.

That said, I think the scenario is highly unlikely. We're going to see some previously red states turn a nice shade of blue this year.

[Mezzo]

12. Blame Hillary.

The same people who want to cast aside votes with the oh so democratic argument 'both sides agreed their votes would not count' (which encompasses its very own Stalinist hue, don't it?) have got their head so far up their own ass that they don't realize that NO ONE GETS TO DECIDE for a voter who's vote will count, etc.

That I am even having this conversation is surreal, but hey, these must have been the same peeps who thought W should have been installed in 2000.

[rug]

13. It's the Math.

[Joe the Revelator]

14. Unless there is something like hanging chad senario keeping Obama from the E.C lead...

there wouldn't really be anything TO do. Everyone knows the rules going in, its up to Obama to run an EC campaign.

[WinkyDink]

15. Cart, horse.

[Windy]

19. Hillary didn't win the popular vote, just so you know.

4 caucus states that he won did not release their vote counts and they weren't included in the total.
I don't know what is to be gained by continuing to foster this myth at this stage.

[MonkeyFunk]

22. There are estimates of the votes in those states

and she wins the popular vote.

[Donkey_Punch_Dubya]

20. The Worst Case Scenario is Obama wins the popular vote by

5-7 million votes, so the popular vote is 52-47%, a definitive preference by the nationwide voters. But magically, McCain wins several states by 3000 votes where the exit polls show Obama winning by 10%. McCain wins the electoral college 271-267 or something extremely close.

Then every single republican screams that the Constitution has to be followed and anyone questioning it should be sent to Gitmo. There is no doubt that not a single republican will say anything bad about this scenario. The election will have been stolen in enough states even though it was a crushing Democratic win in the popular vote, not 500,000 like Gore had.

If McCain wins the popular vote while Obama wins the electoral college, then every single republican plus the media will be screaming outrage and demanding the McCain be giving the presidency, by forcing the electoral college voters for Obama to change their votes to McCain.

I think if Obama wins the pop but loses the EC, there will be a movement for a Constitutional Amendment that electoral votes be proportional, which makes these very situations less likely (even though in all the 3 EV states it would only by 2-1). But this kind of amendment will not take effect until years after McCain is in the White House.

[iamjoy]

21. Massive Protests

We must be very careful that no one gets hurt and that private property is respected, but a little civil disobedience would not be out of line.

In the end though, what could we accomplish? Dubya lost the popular vote, but got into office and acted like he had a mandate for his reactionary agenda.

So, we must keep it up and not let it go. We can't however, be seen as whining, it has to be strategic. We need to have our leaders on television and in the papers every time McCain tries to do something reminding people, "He did not win the popular vote. The majority of the people in this country do not support his agenda."

Our Senators need to reject his radical court appointees reminding people that the majority of this country does not share McCain's 19th century vision of the judicial system.

We need to resist his budget reminding people again that most American do not support McCain's ideas on health care and giveaways to the wealthiest at the cost of working class families. Don't say most vulnerable or poorest, too many people have this dumb idea that the poor deserve it. Include middle class, white collar and blue collar workers as the ones McCain wants to hurt.

Yes, we need to risk being obstructionist and it will be a fine needle to thread - we are not whining, we are not contesting the results, we are standing up for Americans.

[Avalon6]

23. He would have a good argument if he wants to run again in 2012

[QC]

28. Rules are rules! Get over it!

I believe those were the two most popular Republican lines last time, and were eagerly taken up by many people on this very board in the ast few months.

[Clear Blue Sky]

29. The only response is "President McCain".

That's how the system works. Don't like it? Amend the Constitution.