Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
36 bytes added ,  18:46, June 3, 2020
also called "battleground states"
Line 1: Line 1:  
''See [[early voting]] for an analysis of voting in '''swing states'''.''
 
''See [[early voting]] for an analysis of voting in '''swing states'''.''
   −
'''Swing states''' are [[state]]s in which neither the [[Republican]] nor [[Democratic]] candidate has a clear majority of the voters' support prior to a Presidential election, and therefore could "swing" the presidential election outcome in either direction. They are also known as "battleground states" because they are where the majority of the campaigning takes place for both parties. Since states that consistently express a preference for either the Democratic or Republican candidate are usually referred to as [[blue state]]s and [[red state]]s, respectively, these states are also called "purple states" in order to highlight their mixed demographic nature.  Hundreds of millions of dollars in negative ads by [[Super PAC]]s are spent almost entirely in swing states, where the presidential election outcome is expected to be decided.
+
'''Swing states''', also called "battleground states," are [[state]]s in which neither the [[Republican]] nor [[Democratic]] candidate has a clear majority of the voters' support prior to a Presidential election, and therefore could "swing" the presidential election outcome in either direction. They are also known as "battleground states" because they are where the majority of the campaigning takes place for both parties. Since states that consistently express a preference for either the Democratic or Republican candidate are usually referred to as [[blue state]]s and [[red state]]s, respectively, these states are also called "purple states" in order to highlight their mixed demographic nature.  Hundreds of millions of dollars in negative ads by [[Super PAC]]s are spent almost entirely in swing states, where the presidential election outcome is expected to be decided.
    
These states take on increased significance because most states award their electoral college votes on a winner-take-all basis.  So, if one candidate gains a slim majority of the votes from a swing state, all of the electoral college votes are awarded to that candidate, despite the votes of the other 49% of the state's voters.  [[Maine]] and [[Nebraska]] are the only two current exceptions; both states split their electoral vote between those representing congressional districts (the winner of the district receives the vote) and those representing Senators (the winner of the statewide vote receives these two votes). The two states can have "swing congressional districts"; however, only one time (2008, in Nebraska) did a district go to a candidate other than the statewide winner.
 
These states take on increased significance because most states award their electoral college votes on a winner-take-all basis.  So, if one candidate gains a slim majority of the votes from a swing state, all of the electoral college votes are awarded to that candidate, despite the votes of the other 49% of the state's voters.  [[Maine]] and [[Nebraska]] are the only two current exceptions; both states split their electoral vote between those representing congressional districts (the winner of the district receives the vote) and those representing Senators (the winner of the statewide vote receives these two votes). The two states can have "swing congressional districts"; however, only one time (2008, in Nebraska) did a district go to a candidate other than the statewide winner.
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,203

edits

Navigation menu