What happens if there’s a tie in the popular vote in a state?
Posted by Spare_Monitor6524@reddit | AskAnAmerican | View on Reddit | 95 comments
My american friends, I’m a political nerd from Europe. We are so always told how close this election is (and most likely will be). I know about the elector collage, ”the winner takes it all”-system and it’s relationship with the popular vote. My question is, what happens if there’s a tie in the popular vote in a specific state? Recounts are done and the results stands. Like both the two biggest parties get 1,000,000 votes each. Which party gets the electors?
Marrymechrispratt@reddit
Every state has its own rules. But this has never happened. It's statistically impossible.
fasterthanfood@reddit
It’s very unlikely, but statistically unlikely things happen. Every few years in California, two candidates for things offices such as city council have to draw lots to see who enters office and who goes home a loser despite getting just as many votes, and just this year, a primary election for a California Congressional seat ended in a 30,249-to-30,249 tie.
Spare_Monitor6524@reddit (OP)
So it has actually happend? I didn’t know that asking haha
machagogo@reddit
The entire election process is left to the states.
There technically is no "federal" election, only state elections for federal offices.
In the US the states delegate powers to the federal government, not the other way around as in most all other countries.
ColossusOfChoads@reddit
IMO this allows for all sorts of shenanigans. But could we trust Congress to implement any kind of national-level solution?
Some people say we should shelve our Constitution and write a new one from scratch. I would be in favor of that, were it not for the high likelihood of the 'write a new one' part being a shit-show right out the gate.
machagogo@reddit
This is why I would be whole against it. It would absolutely be written for corporations and political power, with nary a thought of personal rights.
In the end it would be thousands of pages of gibberish.
ColossusOfChoads@reddit
The US Constitution wasn't intended to be weaponized, but it's used that way.
Constitution 2.0 would be designed for exactly that, sixteen ways from sunday.
iamcarlgauss@reddit
Eh, the Constitution delegates powers to the federal government, and federal law supersedes state law. The states just also have a lot of power.
machagogo@reddit
iamcarlgauss@reddit
Right. All federal government powers are delegated by the constitution, exactly like your quote says.
machagogo@reddit
Do you think the federal government wrote the constitution or ratified it's amendments?
iamcarlgauss@reddit
No, I understand that the constitution was ratified by the states. So yes, in that way they delegated power to the federal government 250 years ago. But they can't leave and they can't take any power away from the federal government. Seems kind of weak to say that they delegate power to the federal government when they literally have no choice but to do so.
machagogo@reddit
The states absolutely can decide to ratify an amendment to take power back, or to allow a state to leave.
NorwegianSteam@reddit
If it is an area of law the Constitution has delegated to the Feds. Otherwise it's supposed to stay with the states, but the Ninth and Tenth Amendments don't exist anymore.
iamcarlgauss@reddit
I guess we're saying the same thing, but if it's not delegated to the feds, then they're not supposed to be making a law about it in the first place. But the point still stands that if the feds pass a law that is constitutionally sound, it supersedes any contradictory laws that states may have.
fasterthanfood@reddit
Not the vote for president, but the vote for other offices that only represent part of the state have been tied, yeah.
There are many more of those, and they have fewer voters, so ties are statistically more likely.
CupBeEmpty@reddit
Technically also for president. You are voting for electoral college delegates.
fasterthanfood@reddit
True, but what I mean is that the average city council race has something like 5,000 voters, while California (obviously one of the largest states) has 39 million people, some large portion of which actually vote, making it much less likely that there will be a tie. What happens if the electoral college ties is an entirely different question.
CupBeEmpty@reddit
Oh yeah I just meant it is still a state election to send a delegate/senator/congressman even if it is for a federal position
49Flyer@reddit
You know there are other elections besides the President, right? There are plenty of examples (usually at the local level) of elections ending in ties. Most states specify a coin toss or the drawing of lots to resolve ties.
Spare_Monitor6524@reddit (OP)
The presidental election practically being decided by a coin toss would be anticlimatic, I gotta admit that.
ColossusOfChoads@reddit
I dunno, man. I think I'd be shitting my pants while the coin was in mid-air.
We're all clutching our butts over here as it is. It feels like a coin flip, and there's a great deal at stake.
Hylian_ina_halfshell@reddit
Its nearly impossible. But not statistically.
rrsafety@reddit
Bush won Florida's electoral votes by a margin of only 537 votes out of almost six million cast .... 0.009%
Marrymechrispratt@reddit
But he didn't tie, did he?
albertnormandy@reddit
Statistically improbable, not impossible.
Spare_Monitor6524@reddit (OP)
Yeah, i know haha. I mostly wanted to ask a theoretical question. I guessed it goes back to the states.
Redbubble89@reddit
We had this in Virginia back in 2017 for a House of Delegate seat in Richmond. Democrat Shelly Simonds lost because her name wasn't picked out of a bowel but won the election 2 years later. How this works on a national level with millions of votes, I have no idea. Bush won Florida by 537 votes in 2000 but it would be insane to have 11 million votes and have it be a tie.
ColossusOfChoads@reddit
They had to call in a proctologist?
erin_burr@reddit
It's extremely unlikely. A state legislature race in Virginia resulted in a 11,607-11,607 tie. They put names into a bowl and picked one at random. (To make it worse, the seat also determined whether Republicans had a 1 seat majority). Every state will do it differently, though.
Blaine1111@reddit
I mean that's really no different than a simple recount, the random error in counting at that scale would decide an election. Might as well admit it and just do a 50-50
ColossusOfChoads@reddit
Make 'em fight each other!
Kellosian@reddit
"Guys I don't feel like my vote really matters, what can literally one vote do?"
If_I_must@reddit
I went to watch that. Strange experience.
BankManager69420@reddit
I Knew a local candidate for State rep who lost the GOP primary by like 6 votes.
appleparkfive@reddit
Yeah in a situation like that, there should be an additional mandatory debate and another election round. And then after that maybe the stupid games can start.
Because people will vote or not vote depending on where things sit. If people don't think it's close for a candidate, they might not bother voting at all. Or if their candidate is way ahead, same situation. But if it's a literal tie, people might act differently
Sabertooth767@reddit
States can allocate their electoral votes however they want, so it's up to the state to decide what to do in such a scenario.
DragonLordAcar@reddit
It is also becoming more popular for states to have to side with the popular vote
EpicAura99@reddit
Could you rephrase? There’s a lot of confusion in this thread about what you mean, myself included.
ColossusOfChoads@reddit
That's because we have a very confusing system.
DragonLordAcar@reddit
A lot of states have passed a law that wherever the state popular vote lands, that's where all their electoral votes go.
EpicAura99@reddit
I mean yeah that’s what should be happening (minus ME + NE). Unfaithful electors are an extremely pointless level of bullshit.
dcgrey@reddit
You'll want to clarify what "becoming more popular" means. No state currently awards its electoral votes to the national popular vote winner, but many states have passed laws toward a "National Popular Vote Interstate Compact": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact. The constitutionality of such a compact is an open question.
DragonLordAcar@reddit
Why would national popular vote matter at the state level? Are you trying to misrepresent what I am saying?
BugRevolution@reddit
Your statement makes no sense if it's not about the national popular vote.
All states side with the popular vote when it comes to the electoral college, regardless of whether it's proportionally or winner-takes-all.
DragonLordAcar@reddit
Now I'm confused. Why is national even being brought up. It's at the state level? Why is everyone thinking it's national? States have been passing legislation that they must align their votes to the STATE popular vote. Did I really need to point that out when it was obvious.
BugRevolution@reddit
Because several states have signed onto an agreement to have their electors go to whoever wins the national popular vote, if sufficient states sign on (i.e. enough to determine the presidency).
Which would then be the states respecting the national popular vote, which is a change from the status quo of ALL states respecting the state popular vote.
I.e. your statement literally made no sense and was even wrong. Congratulations.
DragonLordAcar@reddit
So you are pointing out the same legislation I was. Why are you arguing with me?
BugRevolution@reddit
No, you were not talking about the national popular vote.
dcgrey@reddit
Ooookay, so...I misunderstood that you weren't talking about the national popular vote? That instead you were actually talking about state-level popular votes and...you therefore think there are a bunch of states that don't award their electoral college votes to the winner of the state's popular vote?
Or did you mean something entirely different and misrepresented yourself...yourself?
DragonLordAcar@reddit
It's a legislation that is being passed because votes weren't going towards the popular votes because the electoral board was actually not required to vote according to the popular vote.
ColossusOfChoads@reddit
Really? Like, what would they use as lots? Would the governor be the one doing the drawing? Would the lots be in some big oaken chest or something?
byebybuy@reddit
To be clear for OP, some states will split their electoral votes proportionally, and others are "winner take all."
Sowf_Paw@reddit
Maine and Nebraska split their votes in a winner-take-all fashion by congressional district, with the overall winner of the state getting the two votes representing the Senate seats. For both states this is expected to mean only one electoral vote going the other way, I would hardly call it proportional. The 48 other states and the District of Columbia are winner-tale-all.
byebybuy@reddit
Fixed.
Techaissance@reddit
What would happen? A constitutional crisis either for the state constitution or the national constitution, possibly both. There would certainly be a statewide manual recount and several lawsuits thrown around. Something would come before the Supreme Court, and knowing. Then, they’d probably find some justification for why Trump wins that state.
84JPG@reddit
Theres a recount and whoever is able to get most votes thrown off in court wins the election.
If somehow the election remains tied, then the state legislature could appoint the electors at its discretion (aka whatever party has a majority in the state legislature wins), or choose not to send electors.
Weightmonster@reddit
Not accurate. Each state has their own way to resolve a tie. It’s written into their laws and not made up at the time.
Spare_Monitor6524@reddit (OP)
Could a state decide to spilt it’s electoral votes like that? Even if that was not the terms for the election? (I think I have a memory that they can)
Weightmonster@reddit
You know, I looked this up recently. First if it was ever that close, expect a lot of fighting over the legitimacy of this ballot or that. Wrong date on mail in ballot? Thrown out. Signature different? Thrown out. Name spelled wrong? Thrown out.
BUT if after the ballots are counted and recounted and the legal challenges are exhausted, each state has their own process for resolving a tie in the presidential election in that state.
SHORT ANSWER: It varies by state.
Shakezula84@reddit
Each state has their own laws to decide a tie vote. In Washington State, it's the law that the two candidates go to the Secretary of States office and the election is decided by either drawing the winners name or by coin toss.
This would be done after any recounts, of course.
Odd-Help-4293@reddit
Well, they'd start out by doing a recount. That's common any time there's a very close race, to rule out any errors. I used to live in a town where our county council race was so close it would come down to about 10 votes, and they'd spend a couple weeks recounting every ballot by hand to make sure the tally was right.
I don't know what they would do in case of an actual tie. Probably either have an emergency special election to try again, or have the state legislature vote.
Zardozin@reddit
I’ve never seen a state wide tie
Occasionally this happens in a small town and they cut cards for it, after many recounts.
Watchfull_Hosemaster@reddit
Civil War ensues
MulayamChaddi@reddit
I believe this is why the swimsuit round is so important
Practical-Ordinary-6@reddit
I have it on good authority that Trump is working hard on his baton skills.
Jhamin1@reddit
Every state has their own rules.
In the State of Iowa, the candidates names are both put on slips of paper and then put in a box. Someone draws out a name and that person wins.
This is a law they have on the books.
Practical-Ordinary-6@reddit
Iowa should have a pig race, with one pig dedicated to each candidate. Or even multiple ones, where the first candidate to get two pigs across the line is the winner so it's not just a total fluke. :) Let the states show their personalities.
ParoxysmAttack@reddit
Honestly, I don’t want to find out. It will likely involve violence considering today’s political climate.
Spare_Monitor6524@reddit (OP)
For your countrys sake, I hope a tie like I suggested never happens. Like your presidental election possibly being decided by a coin toss, it is insane.
leafbelly@reddit
This basically happened in Florida in 2000. It wasn't technically a tie, but it was so close that challenges over ballot integrity and consistency would have probably continues for months or even years, so it went to the Supreme Court of the United States, which voted -- along party lines -- to award all electoral votes to George W. Bush. That was enough to give him the presidency.
MadTrader26@reddit
There won’t ever be a tie because dead people and illegal immigrants greatly outweigh everyone else
ThomasRaith@reddit
The 2000 Election between George W Bush and Al Gore came down to an extremely narrow (within a couple hundred votes) in the state of Florida. There was some amused speculation at the time of how an actual tie could be resolved. Interestingly, there are no constitutional requirements for this. Some proposed ways were:
Betting on the outcome of the Harvard/Yale football game (the two men's alma maters).
A hand of poker
A coin toss
A game of rock-paper-scissors.
The Florida legislature could have picked any of these and it would have been a constitutionally valid method of picking the president.
DrGerbal@reddit
Duel, the 2 Candidates select dueling pistols. Go out in-front of the Lincoln memorial and whoever wins becomes the next president. People will say I’m making shit up, but it’s a small sub text bi line in the constitution
Spare_Monitor6524@reddit (OP)
That’s sounds classic american to me!
theconcreteclub@reddit
Thats a good question. When you google it all you get is Electoral college answers.
Each state is different but here is a link on how the states decide how a tie vote in local/legislative elections are held:
https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/resolving-tied-elections-for-legislative-offices
If a state doesnt have provisions for a Presidential election Im assuming they'd hold a new election. The states have until Dec 17 to certify their electoral college vote.
If a new election is not held then most likely state legislatures can decide who to throw their electoral college votes to and which political party does that is sure to lose the following election.
robbbbb@reddit
Seems like the logical thing to do would be to split the electors between the two candidates in the event of a tie. And either draw lots or have the legislature chose the odd elector in the event that there isn't an even number of electors.
But they'll never use logic.
SnooRadishes7189@reddit
What also make it unlikely is that there is a tie for President is that are more than two candidates for President. There are third parties who will get some votes. Cornel West, Jill Stein, and Chase Oliver are also running. Highly unlikely that they will win but the vote will be split more than two ways.
The other complication is the timeline. The Electoral college must meet on December 17, 2024 which does not give much time for things like recounts or run offs. How it is handled would depend on the State. If this problem has not been resolved by then the state would be in danger of not having it's electoral votes count towards the total number of electoral votes. The way it was handled in the distant past was that the President was selected by having a majority of the electoral votes present when Congress meet to count them. Last time that happened was the civil war. However it did happen in a
The way the Constitution works is that the it calls for the sate legislatures to select members of their electoral college. There technically s no right to vote for the U.S. President. They could hold a drag contest between candidates and choose the winner and still be in compliance with the Constitution(if their laws dictate). It is just by state laws that the ability to vote for this office.
For all other offices this is not a problem as there isn't a hard date for a process to take place. The President of the U.S. is really the only office that all Americans vote for.
The other kink is an tie in the electoral college. That would be handled by congress voting with each state having a single vote(decided on by it's delegation). The Republicans would win this one at the moment.
ghjm@reddit
In a tie, both candidates will ask for recounts in locations they think will benefit them, and go to court if they don't like what the elections board does in response. It's almost certain that some recount will shift a few votes somehow. But if that doesn't happen, it's a state, not a federal matter, so the results will depend on the state's constitution, laws and precedents. Federal involvement only happens if the state's policies violate election fairness or are otherwise federally unconstitutional.
Wadsworth_McStumpy@reddit
States set their own laws for elections. Some are regular laws, and some are set in the state's constitution.
In most cases there would either be an immediate runoff election (usually between only the tied candidates, no third parties), or it would be decided by some random mechanism, like a coin toss. There are enough federal, state, and local elections going on that it comes up from time to time.
Personally, I'd prefer the two tied candidates to have a single best-of-three game of rock, paper, scissors. Or a pistol duel. That would be pretty cool.
Rhomya@reddit
States have more power than people realize.
They each of the ability to allocate their electoral votes as they choose, and each state would likely handle this situation differently.
notthegoatseguy@reddit
In my state, a special election would be held if a tie occurs
https://casetext.com/statute/indiana-code/title-3-elections/article-12-ascertaining-results-of-elections/chapter-9-resolving-tie-votes
Except for Gov/LtGov, which is then tossed to the Indiana General Assembly
49Flyer@reddit
I'm assuming you're asking about the election for President, so the first thing to understand is that we don't actually vote for President in America. Yes, the ballot will have the names of the Presidential candidates in most (all?) states but when you cast your vote you are actually voting for a list of electors who have promised to vote for the named candidate. They are actual human beings, and they officially cast their votes in mid-December. You probably already know all of this, but many Americans don't.
In 48 of the 50 states, the candidate who receives the most votes gets his (or her) entire list of electors - there is no proportional representation. As a side note, this "winner-take-all" system is not constitutionally mandated; each state decides for itself how its electors are chosen. A tie would be resolved in the same way that tie votes in other elections are resolved per state law, with most states specifying the drawing of lots or a coin toss.
Maine and Nebraska are slightly different: Each state choose 2 electors on a statewide basis, while the remaining electors are chosen by congressional district. The same principle applies; the only difference is that there are actually 3 (Maine) or 4 (Nebraska) separate elections taking place, any of which could result in a tie. If, for example, Nebraska's 2nd district resulted in a tie, that election would be resolved according to state law and only that elector would be affected.
sundial11sxm@reddit
OP, look up the 2000 election and the "dangling chads" drama in Florida to see how crazy things can get... and then know this is about to get crazier!
HurtsCauseItMatters@reddit
Every jurisdiction has different rules on ties. Since you're voting for electors for President, not the president itself, those rules can get even more complicated, differing on a state by state basis as well.
For a basic tie though, it happened recently at a big'ish race in Louisiana. Sherriff for Shreveport. I think it might have actually been a 1 vote difference, not a straight up tie. The loser sued, and a recount found issues. So they had to have a redo on the whole election. People realized their vote counted and the winner ended up winning by several thousand votes the second time.
Spare_Monitor6524@reddit (OP)
These where two disclaimers I couldn’t include due to the 500 Word-limit but here they are:
Disclaimer 1: I know Maine and Nebraska has a bit of s different system, but imanges this happens in like Maines 2nd district, I think you get my point)
Disclaimer 2: I know this is a highly unlikely scenario even if elections can be decided with just 10,000ish votes in some states as polls are trending towards. I kinda what to know: there’s a juridical or constitutional solution to this?)
CPolland12@reddit
In 2000, it came down to Florida, massive recount. Supreme Court decision. Bush won Florida by some 500 votes when all said and done
AnimusFlux@reddit
It depends on the state's laws. Mostly likely, there'll be a recount. The odds of an exact tie is very unlikely, but it's possible to be close enough that the results are truly uncertain. This happen during the 2000 election, with the Florida vote being within a few hundred votes, which triggered a recount.
Essentially, when elections end up being this close it becomes a complicated legal battle, with whichever party appears to be ahead in the moment fighting tooth and nail to stop the recounting process, and the party that's beyond pulling out all the stops to try to keep the recount going.
There are probably a few states with novel elections laws for dealing with these edge cases, but this seems to be the process whenever there's been a recount in any of the common battleground states where things tend to get so close.
namhee69@reddit
Lawsuits and about a dozen recounts of the concerned state. Arguments about individual ballots would ensure. A “hanging chad” is a great example from history.
I mean… for exactly 50/50 vote split you gotta be shockingly unlucky for that.
QuarterMaestro@reddit
There would likely be a runoff election since every state as far as I know has minor third party candidates on the ballot. If there were an exact tie with only two candidates on the ballot, each state's election law would dictate. The state's Supreme Court might have to make rulings if the election law was unclear.
Cw2e@reddit
Elector decides if your scenario deals with a tie in the state. If your scenario deals with a split in the presidential election, it goes to a contingent election decided by the newly sworn in Congress with the Senate deciding the vice president. There are some other scenarios that I know about because of the television show Veep and can't verify.
Soundwave-1976@reddit
Each state has their own rules for this.
Vachic09@reddit
It's probably going to vary by state. I would imagine that some states have the legislature choose in that extremely unlikely event
0_phuk@reddit
A runoff election is held as soon as possible.
AutoModerator@reddit
This subreddit is for civil discussion; political threads are not exempt from this. As a reminder:
Do not report comments because they disagree with your point of view.
Do not insult other users. Personal attacks are not permitted.
Do not use hate speech. You will be banned, permanently.
Comments made with the intent to push an agenda, push misinformation, soapbox, sealion, or argue in bad faith are not acceptable. If you can’t discuss a topic in good faith and in a respectful manner, do not comment. Political disagreement does not constitute pushing an agenda.
If you see any comments that violate the rules, please report it and move on!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.