Changes

{{Government Lectures}}

{{Government Lectures}}

The latest polling suggests that Mitt Romney may win the most votes nationwide, but lost the election.  How is that possible?

The latest polling suggests that Mitt Romney may win the most votes nationwide, but lose the election.  How is that possible?

The reason is this:  the winner of the presidential election is not the person who received the most votes.  Instead, the U.S. Constitution establishes an "Electoral College" to elect the president, which consists of representatives selected in each state.

The reason is this:  the winner of the presidential election is not the person who receives the most votes.  Instead, the U.S. Constitution establishes an "Electoral College" to elect the president, which consists of representatives selected in each state.

In 2000, Al Gore won more votes by Americans than George W. Bush did, but Bush won more Electoral College votes and thus was elected president.  Other years when a candidate lost the presidential election despite winning the most overall votes include 1960 and 1824.

In 2000, Al Gore won more votes by Americans than George W. Bush did, but Bush won more Electoral College votes and thus was elected president.  Other years when a candidate lost the presidential election despite winning the most overall votes include 1960 and 1824.

Under the Constitution, the members of the Electoral College meet on one day in December to elect the next president.  A total of 270 Electoral College votes are needed by a candidate to win the election.  If no candidate wins that many (as occurred in 1824), then the House of Representatives picks the next president.

Under the Constitution, the members of the Electoral College meet on one day in December to elect the next president.  A total of 270 Electoral College votes are needed by a candidate to win the election.  If no candidate wins that many (as occurred in 1824), then the House of Representatives picks the next president.

Nearly every State uses a winner-take-all system, such that the candidate who wins the popular vote in that State then receives all of its Electoral College votes.  It does not matter if the candidate wins by 51-49$ or 75-25%, the winner receives the same number of Electoral College votes for that State: all of them.

Nearly every State uses a winner-take-all system, such that the candidate who wins the popular vote in that state then receives all of its Electoral College votes.  It does not matter if the candidate wins by 51-49$ or 75-25%, the winner receives the same number of Electoral College votes for that State: all of them.

The nationwide polls of which candidate has more overall support are almost irrelevant at this point.  What matters is who has more ''Electoral College'' support, and to calculate that number it requires looking at state-by-state polls.

The nationwide polls of which candidate has more overall support are almost irrelevant at this point.  What matters is who has more ''Electoral College'' support, and to calculate that number it requires looking at state-by-state polls.

In more than 40 States one candidate is clearly ahead of the other candidate, and thus is likely to win all of the Electoral College votes for that State.  In only a handful of States is the outcome uncertain this close to the election.  These key States are Ohio, Nevada, Florida, and Virginia.

In more than 40 states one candidate is clearly ahead of the other candidate, and thus is likely to win all of the Electoral College votes for that State.  In only a handful of states is the outcome uncertain this close to the election.  These key states are Ohio, Nevada, Florida, and Virginia.

== More Political Terminology ==

== More Political Terminology ==

With its enormous power, however, came gradual bias.  Network [[television]] was not content simply to report to the public.  It increasingly wanted to influence the public, and shape its views.  It wanted to become more powerful than even the [[president]].

With its enormous power, however, came gradual bias.  Network [[television]] was not content simply to report to the public.  It increasingly wanted to influence the public, and shape its views.  It wanted to become more powerful than even the [[president]].

By the late 1960s, the [[Vietnam War]] was raging in Southeast [[Asia]] and college protests were prominent in [[America]].  The [[media]] began covering the [[war]] as no other [[war]] had been seen before.  Goring and disturbing pictures of violence and [[death]] on the battlefield were piped into millions of [[American]] homes.  Public opinion shifted because of it.

By the late 1960s, the [[Vietnam War]] was raging in Southeast [[Asia]] and college protests were prominent in [[America]].  The [[media]] began covering the [[war]] as no other [[war]] had been seen before.  Gory and disturbing pictures of violence and [[death]] on the battlefield were piped into millions of [[American]] homes.  Public opinion shifted because of it.

[[Lyndon B. Johnson|President Johnson]] lost his popularity and could not be reelected in 1968, and [[Richard Nixon]] won the [[White House]].  He knew the power of [[television]], having used it to his advantage in addressing allegations against him in his Checkers speech in 1952.  In 1960, [[Richard Nixon]] lost his [[president]]ial race to [[John F. Kennedy|JFK]] largely because [[John F. Kennedy|JFK]] looked better in the [[Kitchen Debates|televised presidential debates]].

[[Lyndon B. Johnson|President Johnson]] lost his popularity and could not be reelected in 1968, and [[Richard Nixon]] won the [[White House]].  He knew the power of [[television]], having used it to his advantage in addressing allegations against him in his Checkers speech in 1952.  In 1960, [[Richard Nixon]] lost his [[president]]ial race to [[John F. Kennedy|JFK]] largely because [[John F. Kennedy|JFK]] looked better in the [[Kitchen Debates|televised presidential debates]].