Although not a political junkie like me, you will still probably be glued to your TV set on election night. Obviously, you will be waiting to see if President George W. Bush will be elected or if Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts will become our 44th President. Will see and hear everything that is interesting night? It will also make sense to you? Well, if all you want and find out who wins, you may be a long and tedious night. Volumes of information will be presented the night before a winner is declared. However, if you know a few things to try, this material could make a lot more sense and actually be interesting.
First, you must be aware that there is only one person will focus on the national popular vote, that the total votes cast for each candidate at the national level. Because this does not determine who wins - the electoral votes do. In every state except Maine, Nebraska, Colorado and perhaps (later), the winner of that state receives all its electoral votes. Maine press their congressional district, with the winner going to the other two was that, overall. Nebraska awards its electoral votes proportionally, based on the percentage of popular vote each candidate receives in that state.
The number of electoral votes each state has is determined by totaling the number of its congressional districts for the number of its senators. The number of congressional districts each state has is based on its population. More populous states like California and Texas have far more congressional districts are not the most sparsely populated states like Wyoming or Vermont. However, each state has at least one congressional district, no matter how small its population. Each state has exactly two senators. Therefore, each state has at least three electoral votes. In addition to all states, the District of Columbia is allocated three electoral votes, although not voting members to Congress.
Many people believe that the electoral college, the system of electoral votes to determine the outcome of the presidential election, is inherently unjust and should be abolished in favor of a system in which the winner is determined solely by the national popular vote. Sure, it would take a constitutional change to happen. Therefore, the Electoral College is here to stay. Although this change may get the required two-thirds margin in the House and Senate, would never be able to obtain the necessary three-fourths of state legislatures. There were too many children who would be strongly opposed to it, considering that the electoral college allows them to be "actors" in the presidential election campaign that would not be a purely popular vote system. These small states fear that it would be totally ignored by presidential candidates, without the electoral college. I am afraid they are right.
Many states will "call", a projected winner of that state will be announced by news organizations as soon as polls close in these states. This can be done fairly accurately with the use of exit polls, a process whereby voters are asked about their decision as they are exiting their polling stations. If the exit poll sample only from a particular state shows a clear victory for a candidate, call the state when its polls close. If the exit polls show that a given state is too close to call, you wait long enough the actual vote count is before you call in that state. Exit polls are sometimes wrong, though. The most famous example was in Florida in 2000, when he was called for Gore based on exit polling data and some of the actual results. After most of the actual results began to arrive, however, news organizations soon began to realize things may not go to Florida, the way he had planned, so that soon retracted their call and the state ultimately is went to Bush.
Incidentally, people who say they never believe the exit polls (polls or politicians in general) will offer two main criticisms of them. The first is: "They've never asked." In reality, very few voters ever contacted by pollsters. Only a very small sample of voters is required to obtain a reasonably accurate result, provided it is random enough and varied enough among all demographic groups, geographic areas, etc. To use an analogy that I often heard, is not necessary to Drinking a glass of tea together to discover whether or not it sweet. Just a taste will have, assuming the glass was mixed correctly. The other criticism is: "They ask questions deliberately misleading and confusing." This is true enough for many political polls. However, the main question raised during the polarization of output is: "To whom did you vote?". I wonder what part of the claim that people would not understand.
As states are called, their electoral votes are placed in column one candidate. Also, look for any news organization to use a map of the United States, beginning with each state depicted as white. As the State is called for Bush, its color changed to red, as was called for Kerry, his color changed to blue, then red states and blue states. Look for Kentucky to be the first called. That state closes its polls at 6:00 Eastern Time and will almost certainly fall into the Bush column. Once a candidate reaches 270 or more electoral votes will be declared the winner, regardless of the total popular vote or how many red states or blue has won.
If Bush wins all the states he won in 2000 and no more, will win with a margin larger (277-261) in the constituency which he won last time (271-267). In fact, he could lose one of its smaller states like New Hampshire, without picking up that Gore won, and still win the election. This is because, based on the 2000 census, the population has shifted a bit 'and six seats in Congress (and the same amount of electoral votes) have shifted from "Gore" states to "Bush said.
The key states to watch throughout the evening will be the "battleground" states. The candidate who wins most of these were probably win the election. By most estimates, these states are New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Florida, West Virginia, Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Colorado and New Mexico. Most other states are assumed in the column of one candidate or another. As a general rule, Bush should be strong in the south, southwest, west and mountains and prairies. Kerry seems to be strong in the northeast, upper Midwest and along the Pacific coast. I see no farther west state of New Mexico, Colorado, or be a major deciding factor. E 'already assumed that California, Oregon, Washington and Hawaii will all go for Kerry, while Alaska will go for Bush.
Colorado may be the most controversial this time, but only if everything falls right. There is a initiative on the Colorado ballot to issue its electoral votes proportionally instead of giving all nine of them the winner, as happens today. If approved, this would go into effect immediately with this election. Since the race in Colorado is expected to be close, the results of this measure would effectively take four electoral votes away from winning the state and give them a loser. Therefore, if the measure passes and the candidate who wins Colorado loses the election with less than nine electoral votes, the measure will cost the election candidates. Obviously, a big legal battle would ensue if that happened.
A final item to watch on election night is the battle for control of the House and Senate. The Republicans currently hold a slim margin in both houses. Several key victories, or pick-up, with the Democrats could change things for them in a house or maybe both. Conversely, some pick-up by the Republicans could increase their margin in one or both of the home. key races that could go in either case will be closely monitored throughout the evening.
No comments:
Post a Comment