Federalist No. 10 does not directly call for a national popular vote. James Madison wrote it in 1787 to explain how a large republic could manage political factions—groups of people united by shared interests or opinions. Still, some of his ideas can be used to argue in favor of choosing a president through one nationwide popular vote.
Madison’s argument, step by step
- People naturally form factions. Madison says factions may arise from differences in wealth, beliefs, occupations, and other interests.
- A diverse, large republic contains many factions. In a large country, people have many different interests. Madison believed this makes it harder for one faction to unite a majority and unfairly control everyone else.
- Representatives can help make decisions. Madison favored a representative republic, where voters choose people to make government decisions. He expected elected representatives to consider public views while using judgment.
How this can support a national popular vote
Supporters of a national popular vote can reason that every voter across the country should count toward the same total. Because the United States has a diverse population, a nationwide tally could reflect the combined choices of voters from many regions and communities, rather than giving decisive weight to a small number of closely contested states.
An important limit
This is an indirect connection, not Madison’s stated conclusion. Federalist No. 10 discusses factions and representation; it does not explain how to elect the president or endorse a national popular vote. Its argument about a large republic may be relevant to the debate, but people can disagree about whether it favors a national vote or the Electoral College.
In short: Federalist No. 10 can support the idea that a large, diverse electorate helps prevent one narrow interest from dominating. Applying that idea to a national popular vote is a modern interpretation, not a direct claim made in the paper.