# You Can Win the Presidency With 22% of the Vote ![[images/You-Can-Win-the-Presidency-With-22-of-the-Vote.webp]] **Creator:** CGP Grey · **Published:** 2011-11-07 · **Length:** 6:31 · [Watch on YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k) > Caption source: `yt-dlp` (android_vr client), the uploader's manual English subtitles (`en` track), downloaded on the first attempt; about 1,400 words. Screenshots come from the downloaded video. The video has no chapters, so the outline sections follow the argument. All figures are the video's own, from the 2010 census and the 2008 election; the video predates the 2016 election (see Claims check). Added from Marshall's Summarize playlist. > [!quote] Thesis > "If you have a voting system that allows losers to win, you shouldn't be surprised when they do." — CGP Grey ([5:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=340s)) ## Outline ### The principle: one person, one vote ([0:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=0s) to [0:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=28s)) - [0:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=1s) "In a fair democracy everyone's vote should count equally," but the Electoral College violates this "by making sure that some people's votes are more equal than others." - [0:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=12s) The Electoral College is "the 538 votes that determine who wins the presidency." Split evenly across the population, every **574,000 people** would get one vote. - [0:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=23s) But the Electoral College "doesn't give votes to people, only states." ![[images/You-Can-Win-the-Presidency-With-22-of-the-Vote-t00015.webp]] *538 electoral votes* ### How the three-vote minimum moves votes around ([0:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=28s) to [1:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=109s)) - [0:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=30s) **Ohio:** 11.5 million people should mean 20 electoral votes; it gets 18. - [0:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=43s) The missing votes go to states like **Rhode Island**: 1.1 million people should mean about two votes, but it gets four. - [0:55](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=55s) The rule: every state, "no matter how few people live there, gets three votes to start with before the rest are distributed according to population." Many small states that should have one or two votes get three or four. - [1:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=70s) The shortfall by state: Georgia, Virginia, Michigan and New Jersey are each one vote short; Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Ohio and Indiana two; Florida 4; New York 5; Texas 6; California 10. - [1:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=83s) The Electoral College "essentially pretends that fewer people live where they do and more people live where they don't." - [1:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=96s) In very large or very small states, the distortion is big: "One Vermonter's vote, according to the Electoral College, is worth three Texans' votes. And one Wyomingite's vote is worth four Californians'." ![[images/You-Can-Win-the-Presidency-With-22-of-the-Vote-t00032.webp]] *Ohio's fair share: 11.5 million people divided by 574,000 per vote* ### "It protects the small states": the visits data ([1:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=109s) to [3:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=197s)) - [1:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=109s) The objection (voiced by a horse: "hold on there son"): the point of the Electoral College is to protect small states, because extra voting power makes candidates pay attention to them. - [2:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=123s) "If that's the goal of the electoral college, it's failing spectacularly." A chart of candidate visits in the last two months of the previous (2008) election shows only **18 of the 50 states** got even one visit, and only two of those, Maine and New Hampshire, have very small populations. The region with the most small states "is conspicuously missing." - [2:29](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=149s) The biggest states, California, Texas and New York, are missing too. - [2:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=155s) Just four states, **Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and Virginia**, got a majority of the candidates' attention (the on-screen pie shows 57%). "If you follow the money, it's the same story." - [2:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=172s) The cause is **winner-take-all**: just over 50% of a state's popular vote wins 100% of its electoral votes, so "winning by millions of citizens' votes is no better than winning by a single vote." Candidates ignore states where they poll with big margins and focus on the few close ones, "to the detriment of almost all Americans, which is why it should be abolished." ![[images/You-Can-Win-the-Presidency-With-22-of-the-Vote-t00122.webp]] *Most states never see a candidate* ![[images/You-Can-Win-the-Presidency-With-22-of-the-Vote-t00157.webp]] *Four swing states got 57% of candidate visits* ### "Big cities would decide": the population math ([3:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=197s) to [4:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=257s)) - [3:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=198s) The counter-fear: a direct vote would make candidates spend all their time in big cities. This "ignores the mathematical reality of population distribution." - [3:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=211s) Of 309 million Americans, only 8 million live in **New York**, the largest city by far: 2.6% of the population. - [3:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=219s) City sizes drop fast: Los Angeles 3.8 million, Chicago 2.7 million, and by the tenth biggest, **San Jose**, you are under a million. - [3:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=230s) The top ten cities together are only **7.9%** of the population, and the top 100, "all the way down to Spokane," are still under 20%. - [4:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=243s) Unless "a city with a few hundred million people" is hiding somewhere, a campaign of jetting between New York, LA and Chicago "is mathematically ludicrous." ![[images/You-Can-Win-the-Presidency-With-22-of-the-Vote-t00232.webp]] *The ten biggest US cities* ### How to win with 22% of the vote ([4:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=257s) to [5:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=340s)) - [4:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=259s) The action plan: "win the votes of the people who count the most and ignore the people who count the least." - [4:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=273s) Start with **Wyoming**: 0.18% of Americans but 0.56% of electoral votes. Under winner-take-all you only need "half plus one," or 0.09% of the national population. - [4:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=288s) **Washington, DC:** about 0.1% of the population wins another 0.56% of the electoral college. - [4:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=296s) Then Vermont, North Dakota and Alaska. Your electoral share climbs much faster than your share of the popular vote. - [5:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=306s) Then South Dakota, Delaware, Montana, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maine, Hawaii, Idaho, Nebraska, West Virginia, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, Kansas, Arkansas, Mississippi, Iowa, Connecticut, Oklahoma, Oregon, Kentucky, Louisiana, South Carolina, Alabama, Colorado, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Maryland, Missouri, Tennessee, Arizona, Indiana, Massachusetts, Virginia and New Jersey. - [5:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=326s) Result on screen: **21.91%** of the votes from citizens yields **50.19%** of the Electoral College, a majority "even though 78% of the population voted against you." "This is not democracy, this is indefensible." ![[images/You-Can-Win-the-Presidency-With-22-of-the-Vote-t00262.webp]] *How YOU can become President with only twenty-two percent of the popular vote* ![[images/You-Can-Win-the-Presidency-With-22-of-the-Vote-t00333.webp]] *21.91% of the popular vote, 50.19% of the Electoral College* ### Losers who won, and the conclusion ([5:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=340s) to [6:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=391s)) - [5:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=340s) The 22% scenario is unlikely, but "if you have a voting system that allows losers to win, you shouldn't be surprised when they do." - [5:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=346s) "Not once, not twice, but thrice" (on screen: **1876, 1888, 2000**) the candidate with the most votes lost because of the Electoral College. - [5:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=353s) "Three errors in 55+ elections is a failure rate of 5%." Would anyone tolerate a sport (pictured: chess boxing) where the loser had a 5% chance of winning? For the presidency, that is "a rather dangerously high percentage of the time to get it wrong." - [6:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=370s) Abolish the Electoral College and let citizens vote for president directly, and "all of these problems will go away and everyone's vote will be equal." - [6:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=380s) Credits for the photos used (Tom Prete, hjl, eviltomthai, C. G. P. Grey, powi, J Neuberger, Accretion Disc, pahudson, kla4067, mwichary, daquellamanera). ![[images/You-Can-Win-the-Presidency-With-22-of-the-Vote-t00362.webp]] *Is a 5% failure rate acceptable?* ## Standout quotes - "The method that the United States uses to elect its president... violates this principle by making sure that some people's votes are more equal than others." ([0:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=1s)) - "The Electoral College doesn't give votes to people, only states." ([0:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=23s)) - "The Electoral College essentially pretends that fewer people live where they do and more people live where they don't." ([1:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=83s)) - "One Vermonter's vote, according to the Electoral College, is worth three Texans' votes." ([1:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=102s)) - "If that's the goal of the electoral college, it's failing spectacularly." ([2:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=123s)) - "Winning by millions of citizens' votes is no better than winning by a single vote." ([3:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=180s)) - "This is not democracy, this is indefensible." ([5:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=337s)) - "Would anyone tolerate a sport where, by a quirk of the rules, there was a 5% chance that the loser would win?" ([5:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=357s)) ## Things mentioned ### Books - None. ### Elections and data - US presidential elections of 1876, 1888 and 2000 (popular-vote winner lost) ([5:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=346s)) - The previous (2008) election's candidate visits in the final two months ([2:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=126s)) - US census population figures (309 million total) ([3:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=211s)) ### Places - States: Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Texas, Wyoming, California, Florida, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maine, New Hampshire, and the full list of 39 states plus DC in the 22% scenario - Cities: New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, San Jose (top ten on screen), Spokane (roughly the 100th) ### Concepts - Electoral College, 538 electoral votes, the three-vote minimum, winner-take-all, swing states, direct popular vote ## Biographies **CGP Grey.** The pseudonymous creator of the channel (@CGPGrey, about 7.05M subscribers at capture). The video description only links to cgpgrey.com. Not from the video: he is known for short animated explainers on politics, voting systems, geography and history, often with stick-figure art like this video's, and he co-hosts the podcasts *Hello Internet* (with Brady Haran) and *Cortex* (with Myke Hurley). This 2011 video is one of his early voting-system explainers. ## Claims check | Claim (time) | Check | |---|---| | 538 votes; one per ~574,000 people ([0:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=12s)) | Correct for 2010: the census counted about 308.7 million, and 308.7M / 538 ≈ 574,000. | | Ohio: 11.5M people should get 20 votes but gets 18 ([0:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=30s)) | Correct for the 2012–2020 elections (2010 apportionment): 11.5M / 574,000 ≈ 20.1. After the 2020 census Ohio dropped to 17. | | Rhode Island: 1.1M people, should get ~2, gets 4 ([0:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=44s)) | Correct (about 1.05M in 2010; 1.05M / 574,000 ≈ 1.8). | | "Every state gets three votes to start with" ([0:55](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=55s)) | A simplification. Every state gets two votes for its senators plus at least one House seat, so the minimum is three. The other House seats are shared out by population, but the two Senate votes are added to every state, large or small. | | One Vermonter = three Texans; one Wyomingite = four Californians ([1:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=102s)) | Roughly right with 2010 numbers: Vermont about 209k people per electoral vote vs Texas about 662k (≈3.2×); Wyoming about 188k vs California about 677k (≈3.6×). | | Only 18 of 50 states got a visit in the last two months; only Maine and NH are small ([2:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=134s)) | Matches FairVote's analysis of Washington Post data for Sept 5 – Nov 4, 2008: events in 18 states plus DC, and New Hampshire and Maine were the only small states. FairVote left out debates and home-state visits. | | Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and Virginia got a majority of attention ([2:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=155s)) | Correct: per FairVote, 57% of the 300 major-party events (Ohio 62, Florida 46, Pennsylvania 40, Virginia 23) and about 54.5% of TV ads. | | Elections are winner-take-all ([2:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=172s)) | True of 48 states and DC. **Maine** (since 1972) and **Nebraska** (since 1992) give two votes to the statewide winner and the rest by congressional district, and Nebraska split its votes in 2008. The 22% scenario counts both as whole states. | | NYC 8M = 2.6%; LA 3.8M; Chicago 2.7M; San Jose is 10th and under 1M; top ten = 7.9% ([3:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=211s)) | Consistent with the 2010 census (NYC about 8.18M; San Jose about 946k). The ten cities on screen add up to about 24.5M, about 7.9% of 308.7M. | | Top 100 cities, down to Spokane, still under 20% ([3:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=236s)) | Plausible: Spokane (about 209k) ranked around 100th in 2010. We did not re-add the full list. | | Win with 22% of the popular vote ([4:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=259s)) | His math holds for the model he uses: bare majorities in DC plus the 39 states listed give 270 of 538 votes (50.19%). It assumes turnout in proportion to population and zero votes everywhere else. Later versions of this calculation using actual turnout give similar results (around 23%). | | Wyoming 0.18% of population, 0.56% of electoral votes ([4:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=273s)) | Correct: 563,626 / 308.7M ≈ 0.18%; 3 / 538 ≈ 0.56%. DC (about 602k) is about 0.19% of the population, so a bare majority there is about 0.1%. | | Popular-vote winner lost "thrice": 1876, 1888, 2000 ([5:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=346s)) | Correct as of 2011 (Tilden/Hayes, Cleveland/Harrison, Gore/Bush). 1824 is usually left out because the House decided it and not every state held a popular vote. **Out of date since then:** in 2016 Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by about 2.9 million but lost the Electoral College to Donald Trump, so there have been four such elections out of 60 through 2024. | | "Three errors in 55+ elections is a failure rate of 5%" ([5:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=353s)) | 2008 was the 56th election, and 3/56 ≈ 5.4%. With 2016 included, 4/60 ≈ 6.7%. | ## Related - Channel TOC: [[CGP Grey]]