In 2016, only three of the twelve battleground states in the end were both competitive enough and had enough electoral votes to determine the election, as well as nullify 3 million votes for the popular vote winner.
The winner-take-all method only incentivizes candidates to campaign for the small number of votes that might matter. A presidential selection method based on national popular vote would place an equal value on every vote.
More Americans are moving to states where the outcomes are less close. That means that fewer and fewer voters are actually electing the President.
Analysis of voter turnout over multiple election cycles shows that new-christened battleground states see an average 5% increase in voter turnout.
Both parties might be pleasantly surprised to learn that they have more to gain from courting every voter during presidential elections in not only Michigan, solidly blue until 2016, but also Mississippi, safely red in the current system.
Why would registered voters choose to not vote? According to a poll, 25 percent of respondents said it was a “dislike of the candidates or campaign issues.” 15 percent said it was because of “a lack of interest or a feeling that their vote wouldn’t make a difference.”
