Tuesday, April 30, 2013

Winner-Takes-All Works Against Small States

   I would say, if small states are wanting to weld more influence in presidential elections, they should get away from a winner-takes-all vote count.
   Take the last election, I cannot remember the exact number of states, but it was a small number that either Obama or Romney paid campaign visits to after the nominating conventions. They primarily singled out the swing states, and swung into them.
   It was a tight election, and every Electoral College vote was coveted. But, mind you, if you already know you are going to win or lose a state and all the Electoral College votes from that state are going that way anyway, why campaign there? If it won't do any good, why campaign there. Instead, concentrate just on the swing states.
   Which is what Obama and Romney did.
   But, if it is a tight race, and your state is not winner-take-all, the candidate might think twice about passing you by. If an Electoral College vote is open for grabs in your state, because you offer split delegates, the candidate has incentive to drop in for a visit.
   It redefines the term "swing.state." Now, it is true that if all states offered to split the delegates they sent to the Electoral College, the small states probably would still be overlooked. But, it isn't the scene at the moment. Only two of the 50 states offer split delegations. There is, then, opportunity for a small state to be astute and increase its courting power with the candidates.


No comments:

Post a Comment