President Obama's travel patterns over the past  months have been leaning toward battleground and fundraising states. How does the whole of 2011 shape up? We summarize the past year and look at what is to come as the 2012 presidential election year comes into full swing. 

With the South Carolina primary just around the corner on Saturday, the preferences of South Carolina voters are of intense interest to the nation -and of course to the candidates swarming the states. Events, polls, debates and the media are all focused on South Carolina voters. But after Saturday? Forget it. 

Tracking the president's events and visits doesn't produce surprises considering the electoral system under which he operates, but it does provide insight into the inadequacies of our current structure -- affirming that the rules have a direct correlation on the outcomes.

This updated analysis (first published in 2007) analyzes two of the three major options available to state leaders interested in reforming how a state allocates its Electoral College votes: the whole number proportional system and congressional district system. It evaluates them on the basis of whether they promote majority rule, make elections more nationally competitive, reduce incentives for partisan machinations and make all votes count equally. Our analysis reveals that both of these methods fail to meet our criteria and fall far short of the National Popular Vote plan, which is the third major option available to reformers.

In recent decades presidential election outcomes have become more predictable in most states to the point that only a small minority of states are expected to be swing states in 2012. Due to the winner-take-all rule used by nearly all states (meaning a state awards all its electoral votes to the popular vote winner of that state), swing states receive much more campaign attention than their non-competitive counterparts.