Can someone explain to me the winner take all concept for state electors?

Question

and how it fits into the big picture of the election

Answer 1

Let's say a presidential election happens, and one state has 20 electoral votes total. That puts comparable to Pennsylvania or Ohio or Illinois.

Let's further say that there are four political candidates that get measurable results, split 40% / 35% / 15% / 5%

In the winner-take-all model, the highest candidate gets all 20 votes, and the other candidates get none.

In a pro-rated model (not currently used by states, though Maine and Nebraska use something similar), the electoral votes would be split by percentage, so 8 / 7 / 3 / 1.

Let's spread that out over six states, each of the same size. Of these, three go for candidate A, two for B, and one for C.

Under winner-take-all that would be 60 votes for A, 40 for B, and 20 for C. So, A wins. But let's say that candidate C was the second-place winner in all the A/B states. Under the pro-rated model, A would have 27, B would have 20, and C would get 43 votes. Very different results.

The all-or-nothing system makes it almost impossible for a third-party candidate to ever stand a chance, because the candidate gets no electoral votes unless they are top result in each state. And even then, unless they get the total majority.