My NEW Electoral College formula

Ya know, one thing that has always caught my eye is this notion that even if you don't earn the popular vote you can still be President. (aka G.W. Bush 2000).  The Electoral College is something of a phenomenom in my book.  All you need is 1 more vote than your opponent but you can reap over 10% of the electoral vote (Cal).

I think that is wrong.  To give a better representation of who America has voted for and not what state helps the candidate the most, I have a new formula.  So listen here America...  I think this will work better.

The basics start the same as the current Electoral Map.  Decide which state gets their number of Electoral votes as we currently do.  Use 538 as the number for the total still.  But this is how I'd break it down.

Winner -> Majority of Electoral Votes.....  

Each state votes like normal..  but you give a percentage of the states Electoral vote to each candidate.  Like so:

Ohio 2008
    Obama     53%
    McCain     46%

Now in this case Obama gets the 20 Votes for Ohio....  But McCain does have 46% of Ohio wanting him to be President.

This is how I'd break it down.  It involves calculating the Electoral votes 2 ways and then giving the winner the higher number of votes.  Essentially, Winner gets rounded up and loser gets rounded down.  Then the higher of the 2 numbers for the winner is the number you use.  As for any other people on the ballot, unless they earn at least 5% of the vote, they are not included on the Electoral breakdown.

Ohio 2008

    Obama     53%

    McCain     46%

McCain gets 46% of the Electoral Vote rounded down to the nearest .5 or whole number....  For this example McCain would get 9 votes (9.2) rounded down...  and Obama would get the rest which would be 11.
Next you calculate Obama's number of votes rounded UP to the nearest .5 or whole number.  That would mean Obama gets 11 (10.8) and McCain gets 9.

Obama gets 11 for Ohio and McCain gets 9.

Even though the calculations are the same answer, you do this in the instance where a third party earns 5% or more.

This is a much better representation of the actual vote.  You give the percentage of what McCain earned in the state to him, but since he lost, you give the rest to Obama, even if the percentage of Obama + McCain does not = 100%.  Obama was the winner so he gets the rest.  So from a pure % perspective, Obama does not get screwed as he is the winner.

California 2008
    Obama     55%
    McCain     43%

Obama would earn 31.5 Electoral Votes and McCain would earn 23.5.  That way at least McCain gets something out of Cal vs nothing.  Especially since Cal is worth over 10%.

Obama would do better in places like Texas which is always a Red state.

Texas 2008
    McCain     52%
    Obama     46%

McCain would earn 18.5 Electoral Votes and Obama would earn 15.5.

Three Way.....

California 2008
    Obama 50%
    McCain 42%
    Nader 5%

Obama would earn 29.5 Electoral Votes, McCain would earn 23 and Nader would earn 2.5.

I think that this type of formula would better represent the actual votes of Americans and possibly make your vote count more.  I mean seriously, do you think McCain has a chance in California.  So why would you as a GOP person, go vote.  With my method, your vote actually counts more.

So there it is....  Version 1 of Pete's New Electoral College vote.....  You heard it hear first.......