4 Maps Show America Still Needs The US Constitution--Whether It's President Obama or President Trump

Getty - Jim Watson
 The Wildfire is an opinion platform and any opinions or information put forth by contributors are exclusive to them and do not represent the views of IJR.

The United States has gotten through another exhausting election campaign. A controversial president has once again been elected to The White House, and a considerable segment of the population is extremely dissatisfied with the election results.

Predictably, there are calls to ban the Electoral College based on the argument that it is “anti-democratic.” But the consequences of doing so would only make the nation's elections more divisive and the aftermath even more volatile.

Remarkably similar to the extraordinarily tight race in 2000, when Al Gore got the majority of popular votes, but lost the Electoral College tally that decides the presidential winner, there are Americans who want to abandon The Constitution, and have national government according to a majority vote.

Let's show the Electoral College map, Senate map, House races map, and throw in the county level map, as they stand on Thursday. This is important to demonstrating how a national election would only escalate the country's discord and lead to even more divisive politics.

The following is the Electoral College map, according to the New York Times.

Screenshot - 11_10_2016 , 12_24_31 PM
Screenshot/NY Times

Note that not every state has been called: Trump is leading in Arizona (11 Electoral College votes) and Michigan (16 Electoral College votes), while Hillary Clinton is leading in New Hampshire (4 Electoral College votes). We will set those aside, but note that the tallies above may change—although Trump has achieved the election victory.

Now we will look at the Senate and the current state of the race.

Screenshot - 11_10_2016 , 12_30_58 PM

There were obviously relatively few Senate seats really in play, so the media could only screw it up so much. That being said, bear in mind that the GOP has retained control of the Senate, while there is a mandatory run-off election for a Senate seat in Louisiana.

For some perspective, the Republican Party will command the presidency and control the entire Congress. This rare turn of events happened for four years under President George W. Bush. Prior to that, the GOP controlled the legislative and executive branches for two years under Dwight D. Eisenhower, and for a combined eight years under the subsequent administrations of Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover.


The popular vote totals at this time appear to favor Hillary Clinton with a slight margin over Donald Trump.

Screenshot - 11_10_2016 , 12_58_34 PM

If Hillary Clinton gets more popular votes than Donald Trump, it will be the first time since the nerve-wrackingly close election of 2000 that there has been a split between the Electoral College winner and the candidate with the most popular votes.

Prior to that election year, it had occurred only three other times, all in the nineteenth century: Andrew Jackson in 1824, who then lost to John Quincy Adams; Samuel Tilden in 1876, who was defeated by Rutherford B. Hayes; and Grover Cleveland in 1888, who was beaten by Benjamin Harrison.

But the map below provides a powerful rejoinder to the reasoning that we should ban the Electoral College and institute presidential elections by popular vote.

Screenshot - 11_10_2016 , 1_29_50 PM
Screenshot/NY Times

Above is a map of the party votes by House districts. It is a visually striking accompaniment to the countywide voting map, which is below.


The counter-argument is that more populous states have more Electoral College votes. The voices of urban residents are not being “silenced”; it's simply not conducive to a diverse nation of people effectively run by a handful of major cities. New York City residents' problems are not Iowans' problems, and vice versa.

The Electoral College was implemented so people have to reach political compromises in the way that government is run. The federal government was designed to be limited, according to the U.S. Constitution. The problems in urban areas are meant to be taken up in the city and state governments, not in Washington, D.C., and the “solutions” unilaterally imposed on an entire nation through a “tyranny of the majority.”

Another reason the U.S. Constitution designed a limited government is so that states and citizens would have their rights protected should a controversial president come into office—whether it be President Barack Obama or President Donald Trump.

It makes the argument about the popular vote obsolete, since no one person, let alone a Congress of 535 people, should be running the daily lives of a free republic of over three hundred million citizens.