270 Electoral College votes are needed to win the Presidency. But what if no one gets to that number? Less than a year to the election and Gallup says 63% of American adults are open to voting for a third-party or independent candidate. It’s the highest ever since 2003, but it’s been part of a growing trend since September 2012.
This year Americans may get their wish with announced candidates like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Cornel West. Another possible contender is Sen. Joe Manchin (WV) who has signaled he’ll leave the Democratic party for the “No Labels” group.
A December Quinnipiac poll shows in a race between Joe Biden, Donald Trump, and RFK Jr., support for the environmental lawyer turned politician is 22%. In the survey, President Biden would win by 2 percentage points (within the margin of error). The same poll asked if, in addition to the three above, Cornel West (Independent) and Jill Stein (Green Party) were added to the ballot, support for Kennedy and Biden both go down with a predicted win for President Trump by 2 percentage points (within the margin of error).
There is no doubt this election season is already turning heads with many lamenting a 2020 rematch of Trump v. Biden. Could third-party additions change the political game? If history serves as any indication the 1992 election is a good lesson. George H.W. Bush lost to Bill Clinton because of a third party run by Ross Perot. Could RFK Jr. cost Joe Biden 2024?
It all depends on how much media coverage Kennedy gets and the reach of his campaign. In 1992, Perot received a lot of attention from CNN. Kennedy is also using the network to expand his reach. Newer 24-hour outlets, like Newsmax and OAN, could benefit from having Kennedy, West, and/or Stein on by exposing different viewpoints and creating a Crossfire-style debate.
Then again, any candidate needs 270 Electoral College votes to win. With more than two candidates in the race, the likelihood of someone not reaching the magic number does grow. Our Founding Fathers have a plan for cases like this. The House of Representatives will pick the president. Each state (50) gets one vote, and whichever candidate gets the majority of votes (26) becomes President. It does not matter how many congressional districts every state has. Every state gets together and decides who will receive their one vote. Let that settle in for a minute.
Scarier than the possibility of a congressional delegation voting for their new swamp leader, is the growing number of Americans who want to move away from the Electoral College entirely. According to Pew Institute Research, 65% of US adults believe the President should be elected by popular vote. The frustration is understandable, in 5 elections; John Quincy Adams, 1824; Rutherford B. Hayes, 1876; Benjamin Harrison, 1888; George W. Bush, 2000; and Donald Trump, 2016; Presidents won the electoral vote but did not win the popular vote.
Many on the left, including MSNBC, perpetuate this idea of removing the Electoral College. However, those in favor of this idea clearly never paid attention to their High School Government class (shout out to three of my High School history teachers Tina Grottano, Lou Cordina, and Bobby Cordina who taught me an incredible amount).
During the Constitutional Convention in 1787, the founders debated how the President would be decided. Some believed Congress should pick the President, others believed in the popular vote. Many were against the latter of the two ideas for one simple reason, going by popular vote meant large cities would have more of a say than smaller rural areas.
The Electoral College is essential for equality in America so large cities, which have different needs than small rural towns, can’t control who is president. The solution to making more American votes count is not eliminating the Electoral College but eliminating the winner-take-all process.
Maine (four Electoral College votes) and Nebraska (five Electoral College votes) are the only two states that follow this method, but more should. Two Electoral College votes are given to the popular vote winner of each state. The remaining Electoral College votes (Maine 2, Nebraska 3) are split up by congressional district. Whoever wins the popular vote for the respective congressional district will receive that Electoral College vote.
The first split of an Electoral College vote was Nebraska in 2008. Mitt Romney won 4 Electoral College votes. However, President Obama won the popular vote in the Cornhusker State’s 2nd Congressional District (which includes Omaha) giving him one Electoral College vote. Every presidential season the media and politics alike are enthralled wondering if we will see a spilt again in either state. Maine saw its first split in 2016 and both states split their electoral college votes in 2020.
If California with 53 Congressional Districts (55 electoral college votes) had a split electoral college vote we would have seen a different election in 2020. President Biden would have won 47 Electoral College votes (1 for 45 districts and 2 for winning the popular vote in the state as a whole. The other 8 of the remaining Electoral College votes would have gone to President Trump.
New York has a similar outcome if they split the electoral college vote in 2020. With 27 congressional districts, President Biden would have won 24 Electoral College votes (22 for each Congressional District and 2 for the popular vote). The remaining 5 Electoral College votes would have gone to President Trump. This may seem small or insignificant but like saving your pennies, collectively this does make a large difference.
While the Electoral College appears complicated, it is essential for equality in voting. If America elects its President solely by popular vote, then the office could be won by advertising in big cities like New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles, all of which lean left. If instead winner-take-all states were eliminated, folks in Upstate New York and Long Island, rural Illinois, and the eastern side of California may finally feel their voices being heard and their votes counting.
It would also force Presidential candidates (and the media) to campaign (and expand their viewership) more broadly instead of focusing on large cities with left-leaning populations.
Krystina Alarcon Carroll contributes features and columns for Barrett Media. She has experience in almost every facet of the industry including: digital and print news; live, streamed, and syndicated TV; documentary and film productions. Her prior employers have included NY1 and Fox News Digital and the Law & Crime Network. You can find Krystina on X (formerly twitter) @KrystinaAlaCarr.
