Ending the Electoral College Doesn’t Suit All Democrats
But Republicans would have the same strategy that they have now: get out the vote from rural and conservative areas.
Beto O'Rourke is the sort of candidate likely to bring casual voters to the polls.
Photographer: Christ Chavez/Getty Images
Eliminating the Electoral College from U.S. presidential elections is understandably a hot topic among Democratic contenders. Their party won the popular vote in 2000 and 2016 but lost the presidency both times. But such a change wouldn’t benefit all candidates equally. Because campaigns would no longer be trying to win certain states, but rather just to woo as many voters as they can anywhere, the biggest beneficiaries would probably be turnout-centric candidates like Beto O’Rourke — and large, diverse Sun Belt metros.
Consider what types of places get more or less attention now than they “should” because of the incentives of the Electoral College, in which presidents are elected by delegates rather than directly by voters. It’s possible that in 2020 there may be as few as seven decisive states: Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Florida and Arizona. The large metro areas in those states would still get plenty of attention under a popular-vote system, but it’s the midsize metros that get outsize attention in an Electoral College system, cities like Manchester and Nashua in New Hampshire.