One more time, do the math, don’t theorize.
Or look at what I’ve already done, past election results are easily available.
1996 Presidential General Election Data - National
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/data.php?year=1996&datatype=national&def=1&f=0&off=0&elect=0
Existing System electoral votes:
Clinton 379
Dole 159
Perot 0
Each state keep their electoral votes but split them within the state by their respective voting:
Clinton 266
Dole 224
Perot 46
- - - - - -
2000 Presidential General Election Data - National
Existing System electoral votes:
Gore 266
Bush 271
Nader 0
Each state keep their electoral votes but split them within the state by their respective voting:
Gore 258
Bush 263
Nader 7
- - - - - -
2004 Presidential General Election Data - National
Existing System electoral votes:
Bush 286
Kerry 251
Each state keep their electoral votes but split them within the state by their respective voting:
Bush 279
Kerry 258
- - - - - -
2008 Presidential General Election Data - National
Existing System electoral votes:
Obama 365
McCain 173
Each state keep their electoral votes but split them within the state by their respective voting:
Obama 289
McCain 249
- - - - - -
Over the last 4 election cycles:
Republicans gain 185 votes,
Democrats lose 121 votes,
Third Party goes from zero to 53 votes.
I got Bush - 267, Gore - 266, Nader - 5...a lot depends on how you handle rounding...and who gets awarded the ‘leftover’ fractions of electoral votes from no name candidates.
So, I was wrong in that Bush would have lost, but right in intuitively knowing that his electoral votes would go down.
The only thing that saves Bush, however, is the presence of Nader. Under this scenario, he peels 4 votes from Gore and 1 from Bush. If Nader weren’t there, the count would be Bush 268, Gore 270. Similar arguments could be made that Nader’s presence helped under the current system with Florida. However, I don’t see any advantage possible to GOP...and only pitfalls.
Remember, the college favors small states, who undeservedly get 3 votes, even with miniscule populations. Most of these states give this unfair advantage to GOP candidates. The system you propose will let Democrats get a piece of that pie.
There is also the whole notion that we are a union of states. States vote on who the president is, not the people. I know this has been complicated by amendment; but, looking at the original intent of the constitution, splitting the electoral college based on popular vote was not in the cards.
Bush Gore Nader
AL 5 4
AK 2 1
AZ 4 4
AR 3 3
CA 23 29 2
CO 4 4
CT 3 5
DE 1 2
DC 0 3
FL 13 12
GA 7 6
HI 2 2
ID 3 1
IL 10 12
IN 7 5
IA 3 4
KS 4 2
KY 5 3
LA 5 4
ME 2 2
MD 4 6
MA 4 7 1
MI 9 9
MN 5 5
MS 4 3
MO 6 5
MT 2 1
NE 3 2
NV 2 2
NH 2 2
NJ 6 9
NM 2 3
NY 12 20 1
NC 8 6
ND 2 1
OH 11 10
OK 5 3
OR 3 4
PA 11 12
RI 1 3
SC 5 3
SD 2 1
TN 6 5
TX 19 12 1
UT 4 1
VT 1 2
VA 7 6
WA 5 6
WV 3 2
WI 5 6
WY 2 1
Total:
267 266 5