A strange way to pick a president

Steven Hill -One week to go. The countdown to the US presidential election on 5 November has begun. For months, former president Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris have been locked in a roller coaster ride to see who will become the world’s most powerful leader.But strangely, in this only-in-America presidential election process, some voters count more than others. Unlike the presidents of France, Brazil and elsewhere, who are directly elected by a national popular vote, the US president is indirectly elected. Using an antiquated 18^th-century method called the Electoral College, the election is conducted as separate contests in each of the 50 individual states, plus the nation’s capital, District of Columbia.

What’s odd about this process is that a candidate who wins more votes nationwide can lose to an opponent who wins more of the individual states. In 2016, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump nationwide by nearly 3 million votes, yet she still lost the election. But it gets even stranger. Most states are so lopsided – either tilting strongly in favor of a Democrat or Republican – that pollsters and experts can already tell you which candidate will win 43 out of the 50 states. Only seven battleground states –  Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, Arizona, North Carolina and Nevada – will decide the winner. What is supposed to be a national contest to pick the country’s chief executive will be decided by a handful of states with a combined population of about 60 million out of a total US population of 330 million.