Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBucolt, Ashley
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-03T19:48:58Z
dc.date.available2020-03-03T19:48:58Z
dc.date.created2018-05-17
dc.date.issued2018-05-17
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.carthage.edu/handle/123456789/9541
dc.description.abstractThe 2016 election between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump was one of five cases where the winner of the popular vote was not the winner of the election. In this project, we examine the 2016 election to determine the reasoning behind the popular vote vs. electoral vote discrepancy. First, we observe the effects of four different apportionment methods. Then, taking inspiration from Neubauer and Zeitlin’s study on the 2000 election, we change the size of the House of Representatives to numbers ranging from 400 to 1008, and model the election [1]. We also observe the effects of using a proportional voting method within the states instead of the traditional winner-take- all method. Ultimately, using various approaches, we attempt to determine if there is a way to model the election that changes the outcome so the popular vote and electoral vote produce the same winner.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipCarthage Collegeen_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectapportionment, senior thesisen_US
dc.titleApportionment the 2016 Electionen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record