Former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton may have won the popular vote in the 2016 election -- and by an incredibly slim margin -- but her electoral vote is one of the lowest in recent history. Having won over 60 million votes (50.12 percent of the popular vote), Clinton gained only 228 electoral votes -- the lowest for any Democrat since Michael Dukakis ran in 1988.
“This is the worst Democratic performance in the electoral college since Dukakis 88,” Chuck Todd, a news anchor for NBC, tweeted on Nov. 9.
According to 270ToWin, Dukakis, who ran against Vice President George H. W. Bush, garnered only 111 electoral votes. Bush picked up 426 votes -- only 270 are needed to become president.
However, unlike Clinton, Dukakis lost the popular vote by nearly 7 million votes.
But do not expect the Electoral College to disappear tomorrow.
“I think if elections continue as they are, I think the Electoral College is here to stay,” John Hudak of the Brookings Institution said, reports CBS News. “I think that a couple of elections close together where the popular vote loser is the Electoral College winner, I think you’ll start to see much more movement on that.”
“I know that over the past 200 years, there have been dozens and dozens of proposals to do it and it hasn’t happened so far,” Hans A. von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation added.
Clinton is now the fifth presidential candidate in history to win the popular vote, yet lose the electoral vote. The closest previous case was Al Gore’s loss to George W. Bush in 2000, notes NPR.
“The closest Congress has come to amending the Electoral College since 1804 was during the 91st Congress (1969–1971),” the House of Representatives archives states. “H.J. Res. 681 proposed the direct election of a President and Vice President, requiring a run off when no candidate received more than 40 percent of the vote. The resolution passed the House in 1969, but failed to pass the Senate."