Strategic Consequences of the Electoral College

1
Strategic Consequences of the Electoral College
2
Rules

• Each state appoints Electors equal to the
  number of combined seats in the House and Senate
• Electors meet in own states
• Electors cast two votes (P and VP)
• MAJORITY (270 votes) to win
• If no winner, House of Reps. chooses among top 3
  candidates, one vote per state.

3
(No Transcript)
4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
Problems with the EC?

• Anti-Majoritarian
• Popular vote winner can lose presidency
• Can have House of Reps, one state per vote, elect
  president
• Can have Faithless Electors
• Unequal weighting of votes
• Voters in small states mathematically
  overrepresented
• Partisan minorities votes dont count
• Campaign only targets some voters
• Turnout is higher in battleground states
• But rhetoric is national
• But battleground states demographically
  representative
• But no difference in voter efficacy

7
Positive aspects of EC?

• Forces candidates to create broad electoral
  coalitions
• Exaggerates margin of victory, making governing
  easier
• Encourages 2 party system

8
Consequences for strategy?

• Focus on electorally rich (populous) states
• Focus on swing states

9
Targeted States, 2004
State Visits Ads? Difference in two-party percent of vote
OH (20 EV) 45 X 2.1
IA (7 EV) 31 X 0.67
PA (21 EV) 30 X 2.5
WI (10 EV) 28 X 0.38
FL (27 EV) 23 X 5.0
MN (10 EV) 19 X 3.5
MI (17 EV) 17 X 3.5
NM (5 EV) 12 X 0.8
WV (5 EV) 11 X 12.9
CO (9 EV) 10 X 4.8
NH (4 EV) 10 X 1.3
MO (11 EV) 7 7.2
NV (5 EV) 7 X 2.4
NC (15 EV) 5 12.4
10
Targeted States, 2004
State Battleground Total US
Income under 35 K 42.1 41.5
Income over 100K 10.6 12.3

High school diploma 72.8 70.1

Black 8.3 11.4
Latino 7.2 11.0

Mainline protestant 21.4 17.5
Evangelical protestant 24.5 23.4
Catholic 24.3 24.5
Unaffiliated 15.1 14.2
11
Turnout in targeted states
Turnout rate 2000 Turnout rate 2004
Battleground 54.6 62.2
US Total 50.0 55.3
Difference 4.6 6.9
12
Simple popular vote Effects on campaign strategy

• Greater cost
• Media markets replace states as focus of resource
  concentration
• Favors Republicans?

13
Targeting swing voters in a popular presidential
election
Media markets, grouped into equal population units Percent of swing vote Cost per ratings point per 10,000 swing voters
Top 10 32 113.40
Middle 40 33 84.10
Bottom 155 36 72.30
14
Turning out the base in a popular election
Media markets Percent of Dem. vote Percent of GOP vote Cost per ratings point
Democratic base 43.4 31.8 14,951
Competitive 30.8 30.7 11,186
Republican base 25.8 37.6 10,829
15
(No Transcript)