Actually, it may not the way the system currently works. The Electoral College system, except for Maine and Nebraska, awards 100% of their votes to the candidate with the highest amount of popular votes. Why?
Let’s just take two states as an example. Florida has 29 electoral votes. Donald Trump got 5,658,847 votes (51.2%) and Joe Biden got 5,284,453 votes (47.9%). But President Trump received all 29 electoral votes. That means all the votes for Biden, 5,284,453 meant nothing. Shouldn’t the voters get their fair share of the electoral votes? If so Trump would have approximately 15 electoral votes and Biden would have 14 electoral votes.
In California, which has 55 electoral votes, Joe Biden got 8,969,107 votes (64.7%) and Donald Trump got 4,630,099 votes (33.4%). There were other candidates as well. So Biden received all 55 electoral votes and all 4,630,099 votes for Trump did not count. The fair share vote should be Biden approximately 35 electoral votes and Trump 18 electoral votes.
I don’t feel like doing the math on all 50 states but with just the two states I pointed out about 9,914,552 votes did not count in the Electoral College system. Does this make any sense?
Would this change make a difference? I have no idea.
The National Popular Vote bill is 73% of the way to guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the country.
The bill changes state statewide winner-take-all laws (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), without changing anything in the Constitution, using the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes.
It requires enacting states with 270 electoral votes to award their electoral votes to the winner of the most national popular votes.
All votes would be valued equally in presidential elections, no matter where voters live.