USA's Electoral College isn't likely to ever be replaced by a national popularity election.

[Supposn]

USA's Electoral College isn't likely to ever be replaced by a national popularity election.

Electoral College is part of our constitutional compromise; it's unlikely to ever be replaced with other than some compensating provisions for the lesser populated states while such states remain to be no less than a third of USA's states.
Respectfully,Supposn

 

[AsherN]

USA's Electoral College isn't likely to ever be replaced by a national popularity election.

Electoral College is part of our constitutional compromise; it's unlikely to ever be replaced with other than some compensating provisions for the lesser populated states while such states remain to be no less than a third of USA's states.
Respectfully,Supposn

maybe not, but at least the Electors should be assigned proportionally. The winner take all system in most states completely disenfranchise one side except in the "battleground" states.

 

[IM2]

The day will come that the ONLY election in this country to be determined by anything but the will of the people will be ended.

 

[Supposn]

maybe not, but at least the Electors should be assigned proportionally. The winner take all system in most states completely disenfranchise one side except in the "battleground" states.

AsherN, I don't disagree with you.
However, within states where the majority party's congressional representatives are of their own party, it's only the minority party that would wish to upset the state's “winner-take-all” elections.
There's hope for our preferred outcome in the critical purple states.

Currently within all but Maine and Nebraska, all of the state's Electoral College electors are chosen by state-wide elections. Both Main and Nebraska each elect two of their electors by state-wide elections and the remainder of their electors are chosen by elections within their individual congressional districts. But there still remains the problems due to state's major parties gerrymandering their congressional districts.
Respectfully, Supposn

 

[OKTexas]

maybe not, but at least the Electors should be assigned proportionally. The winner take all system in most states completely disenfranchise one side except in the "battleground" states.

All you have to do is convince 48 State legislatures to do that.

.

 

[Lastamender]

USA's Electoral College isn't likely to ever be replaced by a national popularity election.

Electoral College is part of our constitutional compromise; it's unlikely to ever be replaced with other than some compensating provisions for the lesser populated states while such states remain to be no less than a third of USA's states.
Respectfully,Supposn

That is because true democracy is no more than mob rule.

 

[Mac1958]

I'd rather see us fix a "system" that incentivizes and rewards the worst impulses of its participants.

Term limits, publicly-funded elections, ranked choice voting. Get the money out of politics.

If we don't fix the system, we're bending over for it.

 

[kyzr]

The day will come that the ONLY election in this country to be determined by anything but the will of the people will be ended.

Elections are determined by the will of the people, state by state.

 

[AsherN]

That is because true democracy is no more than mob rule.

True democracy, in the original definition, where everything is decided by a vote, I agree. But that form of government does not exist. The closest you come are ballot initiatives. But every official is elected by a majority of the people they affect. Except the President. And the current result of that is a lot of people, both sides, completely disenfranchised. The result hinging on a handful of States, often a handful of districts. There has to be a better way for the President to be selected by something closer to the majority of the population.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

That is because true democracy is no more than mob rule.

Instead of Self-Determination, We Have Snob Rule

True democracy would eliminate the mob element by letting the people vote on who else can vote. Representation needs to be replaced by referendums.

The anti-White Richkid Reich intentionally made your contempt for the voters come true by claiming that giving the vote to unfit races was an extension of democracy. You've been snookered by snobs.

 

[imawhosure]

I'd rather see us fix a "system" that incentivizes and rewards the worst impulses of its participants.

Term limits, publicly-funded elections, ranked choice voting. Get the money out of politics.

If we don't fix the system, we're bending over for it.

Mac, you are correct......but here is the problem-------------> people actually believe that their opinion, is always the correct opinion, and actually fact, lol! And so, we have actors, pop stars, rap stars, and every other kind of star putting their 15 cents in. Tell all of us why don't you, that a financial person knows better than a policeman/person? If I want financial advice, I come to a financial person; as well I should. But, if I want/need political advice, why in the hell should I listen to a financial person, an actor, a singer, or maybe we should all listen to a blue collar worker instead! These people have absolutely no idea for the most part, besides they have a BIAS.

This is absolutely something you should consider as being accurate to a fault.

Sure, you have your opinion..........and opinions are like a**holes, everybody has one. But, if WE KNEW YOUR NAME, and what financial institution you worked for, would you be so brave? Would you actually turn off 40, 45, 50, or 55% of your prospective clients!

Professional people are very brave, lol...........until they get put on display; and I mean, get caught, lol. And then, they have to backpedal as fast as they can. Doesn't make a difference if they are on the Left, or the right. That is something you need learn if you are still working. That is just a bit of advice, but hey, you do you!

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

When the NPV is approved, the Electoral College will lose its current power.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

USA's Electoral College isn't likely to ever be replaced by a national popularity election.

Electoral College is part of our constitutional compromise; it's unlikely to ever be replaced with other than some compensating provisions for the lesser populated states while such states remain to be no less than a third of USA's states.
Respectfully,Supposn

17 states with 209 electoral votes have already approved the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

It is something to worry about, but hopefully it would be found unconstitutional for disenfranchising the entire population of smaller states. Why states would enact such nonsense where they award their electoral votes primarily based upon the results in other states.

Just Dems doing their thing, attempting to win by any means.

National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Anathema]

I am a fan of the Electoral College; though I think the way electors are awarded should change.

The number of electors in a state is determined by the number of Congressional Representatives that state has (Senators plus Reps). What I would like to see is Electors allocated by the Presidential election results in each House District with the two Senatorial votes split unless one candidate or another wins more than 60% of the vote statewide.

For example Massachusetts has 11 Electors… 2 Senators and 9 Representatives. If 7 of the 9 Representative Districts vote Blue and 88% of the overall statewide vote were for Blue; blue would get 9 Electors and Red would get 2.

Minnesota has 10 Electors. If Red wins 6 of the eight Representative districts and the overall vote is 53%_57% for Blue; Red would get 7 Elrctirs and Blue would get 3 Electors.

 

[BluesLegend]

The EC has been a good check and balance on Dem tyranny run amok, it stays as is.

 

[BluesLegend]

Alternatively I'll offer this again, happy to divide the country in two and Dems can do whatever the hell they want within their new borders while we would finally be free of them. We'll build a massive wall to keep them out!

 

[Supposn]

17 states with 209 electoral votes have already approved the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

It is something to worry about, but hopefully it would be found unconstitutional for disenfranchising the entire population of smaller states. Why states would enact such nonsense where they award their electoral votes primarily based upon the results in other states.

Just Dems doing their thing, attempting to win by any means.

National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Jim H - VA USA, National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, (NPVIC) is interesting proposal.
If and when a NPVIC's member government decides to withdraw from the compact, what will happen?


If electors (possibly bound by their state law), choose rather to vote their conscious, what happens; (that's assuming states currently not requiring their electors to be bound to those that voted for them, will all change their state's laws)? Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The day will come that the ONLY election in this country to be determined by anything but the will of the people will be ended.

Doubtful that 3/4 of the states ever agree to anything ever again.

 

[frigidweirdo]

USA's Electoral College isn't likely to ever be replaced by a national popularity election.

Electoral College is part of our constitutional compromise; it's unlikely to ever be replaced with other than some compensating provisions for the lesser populated states while such states remain to be no less than a third of USA's states.
Respectfully,Supposn

Because the rich control the system AND they control the minds of the easily manipulated.

"You don't like Proportional Representation" "NO, WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT IT IS, YOU DIDN'T TELL US AND WE DON'T CARE. FEED US"

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Jim H - VA USA, National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, (NPVIC) is interesting proposal.

I think it's a terrible proposal.

If and when a NPVIC's member government decides to withdraw from the compact, what will happen?

Logically, it would dissolve if the remaining states did not have 270 electoral votes.

If electors (possibly bound by their state law), choose rather to vote their conscious, what happens; (that's assuming states currently not requiring their electors to be bound to those that voted for them, will all change their state's laws)? Respectfully, Supposn

It does not seem like that is a possibility, since the state's electoral votes would legislatively be required to be awarded to the winner of the national popular vote(?).

Regards,
Jim