Bush wins popular vote, loses EC

[12th Doctor]

My professor, Dr. Kozak, recently spoke with political scientist Mel Kahn.  Kahn says that he sees Bush winning the popular vote by increasing his percentages in the south and mid-west, but losing in the EC.  Mel Kahn has successfully predicted the result of every election for the past 20 years.  He says however, that this is not his final prediction and he won't issue that until Labor Day.  What do you guys think?

[bullmoose88]

Wasn't this the scenario most news networks were toying with in 2000 before the opposite happens?

I disagree though, the increased EVs for the South and West (GOP lean states like Arizona and Nevada) probably help Bush, unless he loses Ohio or Florida

[Fritz]

All I can say is if it does happen, you Repubs better not make too much noise about it!

More likely that Bush will lose the popular vote and win the EC, like last time.  Bush has the advantage of all those low-EV states going his way: Wyoming, the Dakotas, etc.  Based on that advantage, I think if Bush wins the popular vote he is pretty sure to win the EC.  The same cannot necessarily be said for Kerry.

[angus]

My professor, Dr. Kozak, recently spoke with political scientist Mel Kahn.  Kahn says that he sees Bush winning the popular vote by increasing his percentages in the south and mid-west, but losing in the EC.  Mel Kahn has successfully predicted the result of every election for the past 20 years.  He says however, that this is not his final prediction and he won't issue that until Labor Day.  What do you guys think?

I think he is a wise man to avoid making his final prediction today.  I am not so wise, and I will predict a victory by George W. Bush.  And frankly, I don't know or care who gets more popular votes.

[zachman]

I'm not making a full prediction until 9/12/2004. The election will turn on that week.

[12th Doctor]

I can assure you that we wouldn't make any noise about it, but I would certainly expect you liberal to rail about how unfair it is that the Democratically elected candidate didn't win and how Bush should be the rightful president.

[angus]

I can assure you that we wouldn't make any noise about it, but I would certainly expect you liberal to rail about how unfair it is that the Democratically elected candidate didn't win and how Bush should be the rightful president.

Fair enough.  While I cannot promise not to gloat should Bush win, I will promise not to bitch if he loses the EC.

[ian]

I think that this will happen.

[© tweed]

this would be poetic justice.

[angus]

this would be poetic justice.

I see you'll have none of that non-gloating agreement either.  

[© tweed]

this would be poetic justice.

I see you'll have none of that non-gloating agreement either.  

Not a chance.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It's possible actually... more likely than a repeat of 2000.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

My professor, Dr. Kozak, recently spoke with political scientist Mel Kahn.  Kahn says that he sees Bush winning the popular vote by increasing his percentages in the south and mid-west, but losing in the EC.  Mel Kahn has successfully predicted the result of every election for the past 20 years.  He says however, that this is not his final prediction and he won't issue that until Labor Day.  What do you guys think?

It certainly is possible, especially since I'm expecting Democrat voters in New York and California to be apathetic, hurting Kerry's popular tally.  It would look something like this:

[angus]

The electoral votes don't quite look right on that map.  California has 55 I think, and Texas 34, and Florida 27.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

The electoral votes don't quite look right on that map.  California has 55 I think, and Texas 34, and Florida 27.

Oops.  I used the 2000 map as my basis for that one.  But it still adds up to a Kerry win.

[ian]

this would be poetic justice.

I can't agree to that either.  WHEN WE WIN!!!

I see you'll have none of that non-gloating agreement either.  

Not a chance.

[angus]

Ian,
normally the gloating comes AFTER your guy wins  

[Kghadial]

The electoral votes don't quite look right on that map.  California has 55 I think, and Texas 34, and Florida 27.

Oops.  I used the 2000 map as my basis for that one.  But it still adds up to a Kerry win.

Actually Gore states plus NH and WV is a 269-269 tie ...

And that is what you show ...

[Gustaf]

I think the whole 'Bush has an advantage in the EC' business is wildly exaggerated. People seem to forget that he won FL by a margin of 0.01% Bush could easily win the PV and lose the EV. And so could Kerry. And still, none of them probably will.

[angus]

I think the whole 'Bush has an advantage in the EC' business is wildly exaggerated. People seem to forget that he won FL by a margin of 0.01% Bush could easily win the PV and lose the EV. And so could Kerry. And still, none of them probably will.

I think that business may be more subtle.  Remember that electoral votes are proportional to a states population, but there is a vertical offset, or non-zero intercept.  A states electoral votes may be given by something like (P/672000)+2 where P is the states population.  So, California has 12% of the nation's population, but only 10% of its electoral votes.  At the other extreme, Wyoming has two-tenths of a percent of the nation's population, but about six-tenths of a percent of its electoral votes.  (sure you can point out that the second most populous and second least populous states provide counterexamples, but) generally unpopulated farm states vote republican and overpopulated industrial states vote democrat, giving the republicans a built-in advantage.  Bush advantage.  I am thinking out loud here, so tell me if this doesn't seem reasonable.

[Gustaf]

I think the whole 'Bush has an advantage in the EC' business is wildly exaggerated. People seem to forget that he won FL by a margin of 0.01% Bush could easily win the PV and lose the EV. And so could Kerry. And still, none of them probably will.

I think that business may be more subtle.  Remember that electoral votes are proportional to a states population, but there is a vertical offset, or non-zero intercept.  A states electoral votes may be given by something like (P/672000)+2 where P is the states population.  So, California has 12% of the nation's population, but only 10% of its electoral votes.  At the other extreme, Wyoming has two-tenths of a percent of the nation's population, but about six-tenths of a percent of its electoral votes.  (sure you can point out that the second most populous and second least populous states provide counterexamples, but) generally unpopulated farm states vote republican and overpopulated industrial states vote democrat, giving the republicans a built-in advantage.  Bush advantage.  I am thinking out loud here, so tell me if this doesn't seem reasonable.

That is a correct observation and I'm well aware of it. If there had been no such weighting, i.e. EVs had been based on House seats only, then Gore would've won last time around. But these things are tight, last election was very close PV-wise AND EV-wise. And throughout history the PV and EV has usually corrleated in this aspect. I am inclined to agree though that there might be a slight biult-in bias towards the GOP for the moment, but I don't think it is all that strong.

[Nym90]

If Kerry wins the electoral vote and Bush wins the popular, yes, I will agree that Bush was the rightful winner of the election.

[zorkpolitics]

[
That is a correct observation and I'm well aware of it. If there had been no such weighting, i.e. EVs had been based on House seats only, then Gore would've won last time around. But these things are tight, last election was very close PV-wise AND EV-wise. And throughout history the PV and EV has usually corrleated in this aspect. I am inclined to agree though that there might be a slight biult-in bias towards the GOP for the moment, but I don't think it is all that strong.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Gore would have won 224 to 211 if each state had 2 fewer EV then now (assuming the one no vote from DC).
However, if you look at who won each Congressional district, then Bush would have easliy won in 2000.  Bush had a plurality/majority in 228 Congressional districts, Gore in only 207.  Adding in the 2 EV per state to the state winner and Bush would have won by a larger margin, 288 to 250.
see:
http://www.polidata.org/prcd/wpr1c19a.pdf

[angus]

[
That is a correct observation and I'm well aware of it. If there had been no such weighting, i.e. EVs had been based on House seats only, then Gore would've won last time around. But these things are tight, last election was very close PV-wise AND EV-wise. And throughout history the PV and EV has usually corrleated in this aspect. I am inclined to agree though that there might be a slight biult-in bias towards the GOP for the moment, but I don't think it is all that strong.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Gore would have won 224 to 211 if each state had 2 fewer EV then now (assuming the one no vote from DC).
However, if you look at who won each Congressional district, then Bush would have easliy won in 2000.  Bush had a plurality/majority in 228 Congressional districts, Gore in only 207.  Adding in the 2 EV per state to the state winner and Bush would have won by a larger margin, 288 to 250.
see:
http://www.polidata.org/prcd/wpr1c19a.pdf

good reporting.  thanks.  so you see it's possible to spin the 'advantage' either way.  In the end, it really doesn't matter since the current system is the current system.

[ian]

If Kerry wins the electoral vote and Bush wins the popular, yes, I will agree that Bush was the rightful winner of the election.

No, you won't.  Just because something should be a certain way (popular vote) doesn't mean that it is that way.  And the EC is the way that the government handles things nowadays.  We Dems didn't complain about the EC vs. the popular vote as much as we complained about Bush's brother tampering w/ Florida, thus keeping us from receiving its electoral votes.  So, never admit that the pres. is the pres. because he gets the most EVs.  By the way, I hate the Electoral College.  If you feel as I do, visit http://keptin.net/electoralcollege/ and sign the petition.