ANALYSIS OF THE CLOSEST PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS IN TERMS OF THE POPULAR VOTE

IN TERMS OF MARGINAL AND PIVOTAL STATES

Rank all the states in terms of the winning candidate’s percent of the two-party popular vote, with his best state at the top and his worst at the bottom. The pivotal (or median) state in this ranking is the state that does not have a majority of electoral votes either above it or below it. The winner’s marginal state is the lowest ranked state in which the winner’s percent of the two-party vote exceeds 50%. Clearly the winner’s marginal state can rank no higher than the pivotal state.

(A)     The marginal state [and the cumulative electoral vote total, i.e., the winner’s actual EV total] and the winning candidate’s two-party popular vote percent in this state (and his actual vote margin over the runner-up).

(B)     The pivotal state [and the cumulative electoral vote total, i.e., the winners hypothetical EV total in the event he had carried no state below the pivotal states] and the winning candidate’s two-party popular vote percent in this state (and his actual vote margin over the runner-up).

(C)     Rank of (A) minus rank of (B).

Election EV to Win          (A)                                                               (B)                                                                      (C)

  2004            270               IW      [286]    50.45%         (13,228)       OH     [274]       51.25%          (136,483)        2*

  2000            270               FL      [271]    50.0092%         (537)        FL      [271]       50.0092%             (537)        0

  1996            270               KY     [379]    50.53%         (13,321)        PA     [279]       55.2%            (414,650)        9

  1992            270               GA     [370]    50.34%         (13,714)       CO     [271]       52.8%               (66,831)       10

  1988            270               IL       [426]     51.05%         (94,999)       MI      [278]       54.0%             (289,703)       10

  1976            270               OH     [297]    50.14%         (11,116)       MS     [272]       50.86%             (14,463)       1

  1960            269               HW    [303]     50.03%              (115)       MO     [279]       50.26%               (9,983)       2**

  1948            266               OH     [303]    50.12%           (7,107)       CA     [279]        50.42%             (17,865)       1

  1916            266               NH     [276]    50.032%              (56)       CA     [272]        50.184%             (3,420)       1

  1888            201               IN       [233]    50.23%           (2,376)       NY     [218]        50.56%             (14,373)       1

  1884            201               NY     [219]     50.0465%       (1,047)      NY     [219]        50.0465%           (1,047)       0

  1880            185               IN       [214]    50.73%           (6,646)       NY     [195]        50.96%             (21,033)       2***

  1876            185               SC     [185]    50.24%               (889)       SC     [185]       50.24%                   (889)       0

*      The intermediate state is NM [279] – 50.75% (10,7810)

**     The intermediate state was IL [300] – 50.73% (8,858). TX was five ranks above MO.

***    The intermediate state was OR [198] – 50.82% (664)