If you take both of those states with a popular election, they will almost always determine the outcome of an election regardless of what voters the other states decide.
“If you take both of those states with a popular election, they will almost always determine the outcome of an election regardless of what voters the other states decide.”
You aren’t far from wrong. The election is not decided by the popular vote. It is decided by an assignment of electors in their electoral college in different ways for their outcome. The feds have very little to do with the election itself, just to verify the outcome. When congress receives the information from the states for January 6, they don’t count the popular vote, just the electors. And there is no consistent assignment of electors in each state. Some go with the percentages by having an amount for each party’s general votes. Some give all their electors away to the winning party whether by one vote or one million. Others like Nebraska and Maine don’t give them to one candidate or break them down. There is no consistency.
So if the two candidates are even one vote apart, only one gets the state’s electoral votes. I see a problem with that as it makes it too easy to have mistakes or intentional changes and disenfranchise half the state. This is why the 2020 was being contested. And no one would ask the question if it could have been done and to look at it. When they looked, they found screwups all over the place that could have changed the outcome. But we’ll never know will we? If you can’t find the facts by not allowing the investigation, then is it worth the money and time to elected a leader. This is what we left in England from kings and queens. The colonies recognized that in the early 1770’s.
wy69