Federalist No. 10 does not directly endorse a national popular vote. James Madison wrote about how a large republic and elected representatives could help control the harmful effects of factions—groups pursuing interests that might harm others or the common good.
How its ideas might indirectly support a national popular vote
- A larger electorate can make narrow factions less powerful. Madison argued that in a large republic, it would be harder for one faction to dominate everywhere. A nationwide vote could encourage candidates to appeal to people across many states and communities, rather than concentrating on a few places.
- Broad coalitions may be needed to win. To gain support across the country, candidates may have to address a wider range of interests. This resembles Madison’s hope that a large republic would make it difficult for a single local majority to impose its will on everyone.
- Each citizen’s vote could count equally in the national total. Supporters of a national popular vote might connect this to the idea of a representative government responsive to the people as a whole.
Important limitation
Madison’s argument was mainly about the size and structure of the republic, not about choosing the president by a nationwide popular vote. The Constitution created the Electoral College, and Federalist No. 10 does not say that presidential elections should be decided by the national popular-vote total.
In short: Federalist No. 10 can be used indirectly to argue that nationwide competition may encourage broad support and limit narrow factions. But it does not provide direct evidence that Madison supported a national popular vote for president.