From my perch it appears that US politics is becoming increasingly polarised between left and right, with the so-called “undecided” or independent voter in the middle determining most election outcomes … so I decided to have a bit of a play with the Electoral College and see what would/could happen if a genuine third-party with a Centrist perspective were to emerge. There are a number of prominent national politicians who could be persuaded to join such a party (eg US Senators Lieberman, Sanders, Snowe, Collins, McCain; fmr Senator Hagel; Bloomberg, et al).

In 2008 the final Electoral College result was 364 to 174 (Remember, you need 270 to win). I’ve looked at the state percentage results and have plugged these into the Electoral College to see what would happen in two examples: those states that were won (by either McCain or Obama) with less than 5.0% of the vote; and those states that were won (by either McCain or Obama )with less than 55% of the vote. A summary of the states in the two examples are:

States won with less than 5.0% margin in 2008:

Florida (Obama 2.81%)
Indiana (Obama 1.03%)
Missouri (McCain 0.13%)
Montana (McCain 2.38%)
North Carolina (Obama 0.33%)
Ohio (Obama 4.58%)

States won with less than 55% of the vote in 2008:

Arizona (McCain 53.39%)
Colorado (Obama 53.66%)
Florida (Obama 50.91%)
Georgia (McCain 52.10%)
Indiana (Obama 49.86%)
Iowa (Obama 53.93%)
Minnesota (Obama 54.06%)
Missouri (McCain 48.36%)
Montana (McCain 49.49%)
New Hampshire (Obama 54.13%)
North Carolina (Obama 49.70%)
North Dakota (McCain 53.15%)
Ohio (Obama 51.38%)
Pennsylvania (Obama 54.47%)
South Carolina (McCain 53.87%)
South Dakota (McCain 53.16%)
Virginia (Obama 52.63%)

The results are very interesting. If all of the states won with less than 5.0% of the vote were instead won by a Centre third party, then the final Electoral College results would have been:
Democrat 291
Republican 160
Centre Party 87

If all of the states won with less than 55.0% of the vote were instead won by a Centre third party, then the final Electoral College results would have been:
Democrat 227
Republican 121
Centre Party 190

In other words, the result would have not been decided and would have gone to the House of Reps.

Given these results, I decided to then have a look at what would have happened if the same principles applied to the 2004 election result. In 2004 the final Electoral College result was 273 to 252.

States won with less than 5.0% margin in 2004:
Colorado (Bush 4.67%)
Iowa (Bush (0.67%)
Michigan (Kerry 3.42%)
Minnesota (Kerry 3.48%)
Nevada (Bush 5.29%)
New Hampshire (Kerry 1.37%)
New Mexico (Kerry 0.79%)
Ohio (Bush 2.11%)
Oregon (Kerry 4.16%)
Pennsylvania (Kerry 2.50%)
Wisconsin (Kerry 49.70%)

States won with less than 55% of the vote in 2004:
Arizona (Bush 54.87%)
Arkansas (Bush 54.31%)
California (Kerry 54.31%)
Colorado (Bush 4.67%)
Connecticut (Kerry 54.31%)
Delaware (Kerry 53.35%)
Florida (Bush 52.10%)
Hawaii (Kerry 54.01%)
Illinois (Kerry 54.82%)
Iowa (Bush (0.67%)
Maine (Kerry 53.57%)
Michigan (Kerry 3.42%)
Minnesota (Kerry 3.48%)
Missouri (Bush 53.30%)
Nevada (Bush 5.29%)
New Hampshire (Kerry 1.37%)
New Jersey (Kerry 52.92%)
New Mexico (Kerry 0.79%)
Ohio (Bush 2.11%)
Oregon (Kerry 4.16%)
Pennsylvania (Kerry 2.50%)
Virgina (Bush 53.68%)
Washington (Kerry 52.82%)
Wisconsin (Kerry 49.70%)

If all of the states won with less than 5.0% of the vote were instead won by a Centre third party, then the final Electoral College results would have been:
Democrat 183
Republican 227
Centre Party 115

If all of the states won with less than 55.0% of the vote were instead won by a Centre third party, then the final Electoral College results would have been:
Democrat 63
Republican 173
Centre Party 302

In the first example, the result would have been thrown to the House of Reps for a decision; and in the second we would have had a third-party candidate elected!!

Now, I think the second calculation in each example (ie states won with less than 55% of the vote) is not the best reflection of accuracy; so I think it’s more likely to focus on the first calculation. In each example, the Electoral College would have “failed” in it’s basic role – to elect a President.

Now I could go back and examine further past results (and may do in the future if I have a bit more time to kill), but I think these two examples show that IF a legitimately strong centre party was established, then they would have a serious shot at winning. But I do think though that this further highlights that the Electoral College was designed around a two-party system, and some thought may need to be given to its future functioning if/when a third party attempts to make a serious run. I wonder if the inherent flaws in the electoral college are the reason that serious third-party candidates don’t run (and let’s face it, there hasn’t been a serious candidate since 1912 – one can hardly call Thurmond, Wallace, etc “electable” on a national scale).

I’m interested in what others think?