Edit: I’m talking more of in the context of shifting populations, not a one-off election. What happens if this is the results of several consecutive elections. Will there just be nothing happening? Indefinite Government Shutdown?

  • TootSweet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    When it comes to presidential elections, that happens quite frequently. How the majority of citizens vote (the “popular vote”) may go one way, but given the way districts are organized (and due to things like gerrymandering), the electoral college’s result may well be the opposte of “the popular vote.”

    When that happens, the electoral college wins. There’s no deadlock or anything. That happened in 2016 with Trump’s victory. In recent times, Republicans have tended to lose the popular vote even when they’ve won the electoral college. But when they do, the electoral college wins.

    I don’t think congress would really come into play except in some rather strange circumstances.

    Edit: I managed to accidentally delete my last post. But I also wanted to add that when we vote for the president, we don’t actually vote for the president per se. We vote for an elector who promises to vote for the president we mark on the ballot. Kinda weird, I know, but that’s how it works. The “electoral college” is the term for the whole group of electors.

    • deweydecibel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You’re misunderstanding the question.

      They’re not talking about a presidential election. They’re talking about the basic function of the federal government.

      The House of Representatives and the President are both elected by the population. The electoral college fucks up the presidential election, and gerrymandering fucks up House Representative elections. But to spite that, both of them are voted for by the “majority”, while voting power is adjusted with population changes to maintain this, and therefore they more accurately represent the people. The Presidency less so because of the college but still, on the whole, it represents the will of the people most of the time.

      The Senate is, by design, not meant to do that. It is meant to give an equal voice to each individual state, regardless of population. Majority does not rule when it comes to the Senate. The only thing that matters are the geographical borders drawn up almost 200 years ago and have never changed since. Again, by design. It’s a deliberately anti-democratic body.

      They’re asking what happens when populations move shift around and congregate in a few states. This would result in a deadlock situation where the House and the President both represent the majority of people but the Senate would increasingly strangle their will. It would create a permanent minority rule over the country, and bring Washington to a deadlock for…well, until something is done about it.

      We aren’t at that extreme just yet but we are getting close.