| Show Candidate Can Run Many Votes Behind But Still Be Elected to the Presidency Editors Editor's Note This Is the see see- cond c arid ond of a series or of three On en the functions function and meth methods ds of the electoral elector l college S S S By n DUTCHER WASHINGTON July 26 Under the electoral electora college system a presidential candIdate can run hundreds of thousands of vot votes s behind hI hla opponent and still win Sometimes It has been done though not in these recent years of Republican landslides A number of 4 our presidents in iii inthe the lase 50 10 ot 01 GO CO years have been d elected b by less than a majorIty of the total vote 4 cast Wilson 1 Was a a. minorIty utcher dent both times In 1912 1012 when Roosevelt a ai 1 Tart Taft split the nc Ican vote h l' l had about 40 per dent ent of the vote and 01 1 per cent of the tle electoral dee elec- toral vote ote In 1916 hIs popular vote exceeded d that or of Hug Hug-hes but not that of Hughes plus the Socialist ad ProhibItion vote Instances of tile the proportional Variance variance va- va between popular r and dee elec- toral votes ar are not confined to third party years In the Civil war ele- ele tion Abraham Lincoln was reelect d dover over McClellan by only 55 per cent of the popular vote but with 90 00 per percent percent cent of the electoral l vote That is LIncoln's and El vote were ere and while Mc- Mc were and 21 Grant beat Se Seymour by but votes of last cast but blit he beat hIm to SO 80 in 10 the electoral college S S S Taft Roosevelt and were all majority presidents Clove Clove- land never was Although he ran ra-n nearly 4 ahe ahead ot of President BenjamIn HarrIson in James JI B. Weaver the Populist h d a lion votes In 1888 1868 Cleveland had polled 1000 0 0 more votes than HarrIson and yet lost the presidency by electoral elec- elec torn toral votes for Harrison and for himself The reason was he had large majorIties in South rn states while runnIng a close but losing race In most states of the North The Cleveland Blame result of 1884 gave Cleveland It a plurality plurality Over maine Blame while his dee dee- tor toral l victory was to He Hewon Hewon won New York by 1100 votes only but that made the important all of forty five yot s In tile the electoral college where an electIng electing elect elect- Ing majority is only MInority parties p prevented front from obtainIng obtaining obtain obtain- Ing a majority of tile the tot total l v vote te Tills This year ear It one of the candi- candi dates should carry New York by the extra would do him no A good ocl except for the thet t f t that its it's pretty hard to steal a a. plurality like that away from anyone In 1880 Garfield beat Hancock by ordInary votes and 49 40 el electoral votes Owing to V aver I lie he was also a president Tilden h lied d at leaSt snOre mOr popular votes th than n Hayes In 1876 even by the count He lost be what appeared to be bc his l electoral votes vote were stolen and the final electoral vote sote a all awarded to Hares was rt just one lone lonc vote All of f which shows hows that the choi choiCe e of a of the people win an el election cUon In ease that's an objection to tIle the system it may be explained th that t the fathers had f of the sort In n-md n when the they drew up the One group all tas dead set against allowing allo the lar larger er states to domInate It U IJ kIA se that 10 candidate ever won an election without the Vo o of pI e r Ness Ness' Yot t tor or Pennsylvania except Wilson In biG 1916 and th that t victories without both states have llave been rare Nevertheless no half haIr dozen densely states cannot annot dominate sImply b bc r huge hulte majorities for a given candidate f They can cast their electoral l votes and no iso more On the other hand band the snore more sparsely populated stat states s are able to cast an electoral vote far out of proportion to their voting strength because they are allowed an elector for each senator as well as for each ench congressman Whereas heres Nevada has one electoral vote for each InhabItants New York has Ilas one for each 2200 0 inhabitants Furthermore the electoral college Is not lOt correctly distributed d. d It Is conceivable that f f the electoral elec- elec toral college were to be allocated among the states today In accordance accordance accord accord- ance with tile the constitution it a chance in the election re- re cult But Dut n not t much more than con con- Electors are re apportioned man for alan in accordance with the con con- It I is notorious that in the house I are lot bot today apportioned on the bazi basi of tile the 1920 1020 census and tw eight twenty states would lose or orgain orgain gain one or more representatives It follows folio of course that they would lose loso or gain votes in the same proportion Alabama LouisIana Maine Massachusetts Massa- Massa N braska New York North Dakota Pennsylvania Tennessee Ten Ten- Vermont and Virginia would each eaCil lose one Iowa Kentucky and Mississippi would lose two each Missouri would lose three California would gaIn Ix f fOur uI Ohio three New Jersey and Texas Tc two and Arizona Connecticut Florida North orth Carolina Carolina Caro- Caro lina and Washington one each Congress has refused to do anything any any- tIling thing about owIng owing ow- ow Ing to th the opposition of members estates would lose one or more seats Thus s some me states which haven't had their share of congressional representation will also be g ped this year far in the electoral colle college e |
