Again, do the math, I have.
States with few electoral votes tend to be conservative and the split tend to favor republicans.
12 of the 13 smallest states (3-4 electoral votes) are almost invariably non-competitive, and ignored, in presidential elections. Six regularly vote Republican (Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, and South Dakota),, and six regularly vote Democratic (Rhode Island, Delaware, Hawaii, Vermont, Maine, and DC) in presidential elections. So despite the fact that these 12 states together possess 40 electoral votes, because they are not closely divided battleground states, none of these 12 states get visits, advertising or polling or policy considerations by presidential candidates.
These 12 states together contain 11 million people. Because of the two electoral-vote bonus that each state receives, the 12 non-competitive small states have 40 electoral votes. However, the two-vote bonus is an entirely illusory advantage to the small states. Ohio has 11 million people and has “only” 20 electoral votes. As we all know, the 11 million people in Ohio are the center of attention in presidential campaigns, while the 11 million people in the 12 non-competitive small states are utterly irrelevant. Nationwide election of the President would make each of the voters in the 12 smallest states as important as an Ohio voter.
The concept of a national popular vote for President is far from being politically “radioactive” in small states, because the small states recognize they are the most disadvantaged group of states under the current system.
In the 13 smallest states, the National Popular Vote bill already has been approved by nine state legislative chambers, including one house in, Delaware, the District of Columbia, and Maine and both houses in Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Vermont. It has been enacted by the District of Columbia and Hawaii.
“Again, do the math, I have.
States with few electoral votes tend to be conservative and the split tend to favor republicans.”
I’d hate to have to wade through it...but again intuitively, we know the GOP is over-represented in low population states. States like Utah, Wyoming, the Dakotas, Montana that get the baseline minimum of votes. If any of these states split their electoral votes, the Democrats will start getting a piece of that over-representative pie. Mathmatically, this has to hurt the GOP.
This is the math.
In the 2008 presidential election, the 25 lowest population states (with 3 to 7 electoral votes) were evenly split with 57 democratic electoral votes and 58 republican electoral votes.