Over 80% of Democrats recognize the flaws in the Electoral College and support abolishing it in favor of a National Popular Vote.

[Razoo]

Over 80% of Democrats recognize the flaws in the Electoral College and support abolishing it in favor of a National Popular Vote. And 89% of those respondents want a constitutional amendment to get rid of it!

But the vast majority of Republicans oppose changing anything about it. They benefit from the Electoral College and its skewed representation – which means an amendment would never get through the 50-50 tied Senate.

That’s why the states have a plan to bypass Congress, ignore Mitch McConnell, and elect the popular vote winner directly.

It’s called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Let's make it law.

 

[Razoo]

Moderate and Liberal thinking women are the largest voting block in the USA thus women could own the
USA government. That's right the most corrupt ever GOP is a minority group by the numbers thus should never win a national election.

The Right to Choose and Pay Equality needs women at the forefront everyday 24/7.

That's right the most corrupt ever GOP is a minority group by the numbers which is why they push the electoral college which allows the loser to win = isn't there something wrong with a picture which allows a candidate with the most popular votes to lose an election?

 

[Razoo]

isn't there something wrong with a picture which allows a candidate with the most popular votes to lose an election?

 

[Razoo]

https://www.nytimes.com › supreme-court-electoral-college
The Electoral College Is a Confusing Mess. Even the Supreme Court justices are perplexed. May 13, 2020. A Colorado elector, Micheal Baca, second from left, ...


Why the Electoral College is the absolute worst, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com › policy-and-politics › 2016/11
Dec 19, 2016 — Hillary Clinton won more votes than Donald Trump. But due to the magic of the Electoral College, ...


Why on earth do we even have an electoral college anyway?
https://www.washingtonpost.com › news › 2016/11/08
Nov 8, 2016 — You don't need 50,546,180 votes to be president — you need 270. The electoral college will determine the winner of the presidential election ...

It's time to abolish the Electoral College - Brookings Institution
https://www.brookings.edu › policy2020 › bigideas › it...


..

 

[Mycroft]

Over 80% of Democrats recognize the flaws in the Electoral College and support abolishing it in favor of a National Popular Vote. And 89% of those respondents want a constitutional amendment to get rid of it!

But the vast majority of Republicans oppose changing anything about it. They benefit from the Electoral College and its skewed representation – which means an amendment would never get through the 50-50 tied Senate.

That’s why the states have a plan to bypass Congress, ignore Mitch McConnell, and elect the popular vote winner directly.

It’s called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Let's make it law.

Well...

It's a good thing that Democrats make up only 29% of the American population.

Party Affiliation

In politics, as of today, do you consider yourself a Republican, a Democrat, or an Independent? (Asked of independents: As of today, do you lean more to the Democratic Party or the Republican Party?)

news.gallup.com

This means that "80% of Democrats" is a really, really small number.

Face it...the Electoral College is here to stay.

btw, that dishonest end run around the Constitution...the National Popular Interstate Compact...has already failed, since it depends upon liberal-controlled state legislatures. There just aren't enough of them to make it work.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Over 80% of Democrats recognize the flaws in the Electoral College and support abolishing it in favor of a National Popular Vote. And 89% of those respondents want a constitutional amendment to get rid of it!

But the vast majority of Republicans oppose changing anything about it. They benefit from the Electoral College and its skewed representation – which means an amendment would never get through the 50-50 tied Senate.

That’s why the states have a plan to bypass Congress, ignore Mitch McConnell, and elect the popular vote winner directly.

It’s called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Let's make it law.

I'd support it.

 

[PoS]

LOL Duh. Of course the dems hate the EC ever since their chosen POTUS Hillary was defeated.

 

[Razoo]

The EC is a corrupt tool. We got GW and TRump because of it.......I believe Hillary had 2.8 million more votes than the Rump.

The EC is out of line ...... it must go!!!!

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

The EC is a corrupt tool. We got GW and TRump because of it.......I believe Hillary had 2.8 million more votes than the Rump.

The EC is out of line ...... it must go!!!!

It must go, but it has nothing to do with Hillary.
It must go because the reasons that it was put into place....no longer exist.
Sort of like the second amendment, the third amendment, and probably more.
We are trying to legislate and exist in accordance with a horribly outdated and obsolete document. Doesnt need scrapped, just updated.

 

[ttwtt78640]

It must go, but it has nothing to do with Hillary.
It must go because the reasons that it was put into place....no longer exist.
Sort of like the second amendment, the third amendment, and probably more.
We are trying to legislate and exist in accordance with a horribly outdated and obsolete document. Doesnt need scrapped, just updated.

That (bolded above) is somewhat true, since being able to form a nation of (volunteer) states has been accomplished, but those states still have an equal say in whether or not the EC gets abolished via constituional amendment.

 

[Razoo]

I do not see reason enough to update such a document that makes no sense. Just remove the Electoral College for lack of reasons to maintain.

Notice the fake GOP spends more time and money in states with the largest number of EC votes. Perhaps both parties are doing this. I say 1 person 1vote = popular vote decides.

How can the EC college be repeated when one candidate receives 2.8 million more votes yet is not selected as the majority choice?

Not every vote counts under the EC umbrella....... or appears as such.

 

[Mycroft]

Notice the fake GOP spends more time and money in states with the largest number of EC votes. Perhaps both parties are doing this. I say 1 person 1vote = popular vote decides.

Not true.

California has the largest number of electoral votes. You don't see the GOP spending more time and money in that state. I wonder...do you know why?

How can the EC college be repeated when one candidate receives 2.8 million more votes yet is not selected as the majority choice?

Because the national popular vote is irrelevant. Only the state popular vote matters.
This is one reason our country is called The United States of America...and not just America.

Not every vote counts under the EC umbrella....... or appears as such.

Sorry, but every vote DOES count. (Or, it would if there wasn't election fraud.)

 

[MAGAnificent]

Over 80% of Democrats recognize the flaws in the Electoral College and support abolishing it in favor of a National Popular Vote. And 89% of those respondents want a constitutional amendment to get rid of it!

But the vast majority of Republicans oppose changing anything about it. They benefit from the Electoral College and its skewed representation – which means an amendment would never get through the 50-50 tied Senate.

That’s why the states have a plan to bypass Congress, ignore Mitch McConnell, and elect the popular vote winner directly.

It’s called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Let's make it law.

Never happen. The one and only way to abolish the electoral college is through the constitutional amendment process, Three fourths of all states would have to ratify. Will never happen.

 

[Schism]

If they were able, the left would dissolve the constitution altogether.

They're already at work to destroy the founders, all that's left is the founders documents.

 

[mvymvy]

If they were able, the left would dissolve the constitution altogether.

They're already at work to destroy the founders, all that's left is the founders documents.

The bill simply again changes state statutes, using the same constitutional power for how existing state winner-take-all laws came into existence in 48 states in the first place. Maine (in 1969) and Nebraska (in 1992) chose not to have winner-take-all laws. The bill is 72% of the way to guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate who wins the most popular votes in the country.

The bill changes state statewide winner-take-all laws (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), without changing anything in the Constitution, using the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes.

States are agreeing to award their 270+ electoral votes to the winner of the most national popular votes, by simply again changing their state’s law.

All votes would be valued equally as 1 vote in presidential elections, no matter where voters live.

Candidates, as in other elections, would allocate their time, money, polling, organizing, and ad buys roughly in proportion to the population

Candidates would have to appeal to more Americans throughout the country.

Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election.
No more distorting, crude, and divisive red and blue state maps of predictable outcomes, that don’t represent any minority party voters within each state.

No more handful of 'battleground' states (where the two major political parties happen to have similar levels of support) where voters and policies are more important than those of the voters in 38+ predictable winner states that have just been 'spectators' and ignored after the conventions.

We can limit the outsized power and influence of a few battleground states in order to better serve our nation.

In 2018, the National Popular Vote bill in the Michigan Senate was sponsored by a bipartisan group of 25 of the 38 Michigan senators, including 15 Republicans and 10 Democrats.

The bill was approved in 2016 by a unanimous bipartisan House committee vote in both Georgia (16 electoral votes) and Missouri (10).

In 2016 the Arizona House of Representatives passed the bill 40-16-4.

Two-thirds of the Republicans and two-thirds of the Democrats in the Arizona House of Representatives sponsored the bill.

In January 2016, two-thirds of the Arizona Senate sponsored the bill.

In 2014, the Oklahoma Senate passed the bill by a 28–18 margin.

In 2009, the Arkansas House of Representatives passed the bill.

NY and CA enacted it with bipartisan support.

On March 25, 2014 in the New York Senate, Republicans supported the bill 27-2; Republicans endorsed by the Conservative Party by 26-2; The Conservative Party of New York endorsed the bill.
In the New York Assembly, Republicans supported the bill 21–18; Republicans endorsed by the Conservative party supported the bill 18–16.

CA supporters included:

Ray Haynes served as the National Chairman of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) in 2000. He served as a Republican in the California State Senate from 1994 to 2002 and was elected to the Assembly in 1992 and 2002

James Brulte the California Republican Party chairman, served as Republican Leader of the California State Assembly from 1992 to 1996, California State Senator from 1996 to 2004, and Senate Republican leader from 2000 to 2004.

 

[Noodlegawd]

isn't there something wrong with a picture which allows a candidate with the most popular votes to lose an election?

Not when they campaigned to win an election based on the Electoral College.

 

[mvymvy]

Never happen. The one and only way to abolish the electoral college is through the constitutional amendment process, Three fourths of all states would have to ratify. Will never happen.

The bill simply again changes state statutes, using the same constitutional power for how existing state winner-take-all laws came into existence in 48 states in the first place. Maine (in 1969) and Nebraska (in 1992) chose not to have winner-take-all laws. The bill is 72% of the way to guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate who wins the most popular votes in the country.

The bill changes state statewide winner-take-all laws (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), without changing anything in the Constitution, using the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes.

States are agreeing to award their 270+ electoral votes to the winner of the most national popular votes, by simply again changing their state’s law

Based on the current mix of states that have enacted the National Popular Vote compact, it could take about 25 states to reach the 270 electoral votes needed to activate the compact.

Support for a national popular vote for President has been strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in every state surveyed. In the 41 red, blue, and purple states surveyed, overall support has been in the 67-81% range - in rural states, in small states, in Southern and border states, in big states, and in other states polled.

21,461 choices and votes in 3 states were 329 times more important than the more than 7 million national vote lead in the country.

There were several scenarios in which a candidate could have won the presidency in 2020 with fewer popular votes than their opponents.

That could have reduced future turnout more, if more voters realized their votes do not matter.

Most Americans don't ultimately care whether their presidential candidate wins or loses in their state or district. Voters want to know, that no matter where they live, even if they were on the losing side, their vote actually was equally counted and mattered to their candidate. Most Americans think it is wrong that the candidate with the most popular votes can lose. It undermines the legitimacy of the electoral system. We don't allow this in any other election in our representative republic.

More than 3,522 state legislators among all 50 states have endorsed it.

The National Popular Vote bill was approved in 2016 by a unanimous bipartisan House committee vote in both Georgia (16 electoral votes) and Missouri (10).

Since 2006, the bill has passed 41 state legislative chambers in 25 rural, small, medium, large, Democratic, Republican and purple states with 283 electoral votes, including one house in Arizona (11), Arkansas (6), Maine (4), Michigan (15), Minnesota (10), North Carolina (16), Oklahoma (7) and Virginia (13), and both houses in Nevada (6).

The bill has been enacted by 16 small, medium, and large jurisdictions with 195 electoral votes

State legislators in states with 75 more electoral votes are needed to enact the National Popular Vote bill.

 

[mvymvy]

This is one reason our country is called The United States of America...and not just America.

This is one reason our country is called The United States of America...and not just America.

Because of current state-by-state statewide winner-take-all laws for Electoral College votes, not mentioned, much less endorsed, in the Constitution . . .

38+ states and 70% of all Americans have been irrelevant in presidential elections.

Over the last 4 elections, 22 states received 0 events; 9 states received 1 event, and 95% of the 1,164 events were in just 14 states.

Only voters in the few states where support for the two parties is almost equally divided can be important.

The smallest states and the most rural states, have barely hosted a major general campaign event for a presidential candidate during the last 20 years.

Almost all small and medium-sized states and almost all western, southern, and northeastern states are totally ignored after the conventions.

Our presidential selection system can shrink the sphere of public debate to only a few thousand swing voters in a few states.

The only states that have received any campaign events and any significant ad money have been where the outcome was between 45% and 51% Republican.

In 2000, the Bush campaign, spent more money in the battleground state of Florida to win by 537 popular votes, than it did in 42 other states combined,

When candidates with the most national popular votes are guaranteed to win the Electoral College, candidates will be forced to build campaigns that appeal to every voter in all parts of all states.

 

[mvymvy]

Because of current state-by-state statewide winner-take-all laws for Electoral College votes, not mentioned, much less endorsed, in the Constitution . . .

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker in 2015 was correct when he said

"The nation as a whole is not going to elect the next president,"

“The presidential election will not be decided by all states, but rather just 12 of them.

Mitt Romney said at a fund-raising dinner in Boca Raton, Florida in 2012:

“All the money will be spent in 10 states, and this is one of them.”

Candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or care about the voter concerns in the dozens of states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind.

With the end of the primaries, without the National Popular Vote bill in effect, the political relevance of 70% of all Americans was finished for the presidential election.

12 states had 96% of the general-election campaign events (204 of 212) by the major-party presidential and vice-presidential candidates during the 2020 presidential campaign (Aug 28 to Nov 3).

All of the 212 events were in just 17 states. 33 states and DC did not have any general-election campaign events at all.

Pennsylvania got 47 general-election campaign events -- the most of any state and 22% of the total. Florida got 31 events -- 15% of the total. Together, Pennsylvania and Florida got 3/8 of the entire presidential campaign attention.

In the 2016 general election campaign

Over half (57%) of the campaign events were held in just 4 states (Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Ohio).

Virtually all (94%) of the campaign events were in just 12 states (containing only 30% of the country's population).

In 2016, Karl Rove advised Trump - “Look, you’re welcome to try and win [a state you can’t win], but every day you spend trying to win a state you can’t win is a day that a presidential candidate forfeits winning in a state like, in your case, Pennsylvania or Michigan or Wisconsin or Iowa.”

“You’ve got to—we had to focus on 270 and that meant that every day that we spent outside those states was a day that was wasted, unless we had either fundraising necessities or a national message that we needed to...” “Every day is vital, and we put all of our time and all of our energy and all of our resources into our battleground-state effort.”

In the 2012 general election campaign

38 states (including 24 of the 27 smallest states) had no campaign events, and minuscule or no spending for TV ads.

More than 99% of presidential campaign attention (ad spending and visits) was invested on voters in just the only ten competitive states.

Two-thirds (176 of 253) of the general-election campaign events, and a similar fraction of campaign expenditures, were in just four states (Ohio, Florida, Virginia, and Iowa).

In the 2008 campaign, candidates concentrated over 2/3rds of their campaign events and ad money in just 6 states, and 98% in just 15 states. Over half (57%) of the events were in just 4 states (OH, FL, PA, and VA).

In 2004, candidates concentrated over 2/3rds of their money and campaign visits in 5 states; over 80% in 9 states; and over 99% of their money in 16 states.

Over 87% of both Romney and Obama campaign offices were in just the then 12 swing states. The few campaign offices in the 38 remaining states were for fund-raising, volunteer phone calls, and arranging travel to battleground states.

 

[mvymvy]

Sorry, but every vote DOES count. (Or, it would if there wasn't election fraud.)

An average of 45% of the nation’s voters are represented in the Electoral College by a presidential elector who supports a presidential candidate for whom they did not vote. For example, in 2020, the winner-take-all rule resulted in treating the votes of 29,191,404 voters as if they had voted for Trump—even though they did not vote for Trump. It also resulted in treating the votes of 39,751,235 voters as if they had voted for Biden—even though they did not vote for Biden. Overall, the votes of 68,942,639 voters (out of 158,224,999) were credited in 2020 to a presidential candidate (and his electors) for whom they did not vote.

In presidential elections, current state statewide winner-take-all laws create the illusion that entire states voted 100% for the state’s winner, because the laws award 100% of each state’s electoral votes to the candidate receiving the most votes in the state. However, for example, in Connecticut, the actual vote was 898,000 votes for Clinton; 673,000 for Trump, 49,000 for Johnson, and 23,000 for Stein.

The price that a state pays for its winner-take-all law is that the Democratic candidates take blue states for granted, The Republican candidates take red states for granted. Every voter in safe states—Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, or Green—ends up without any meaningful influence or voice in the presidential election.

If you live in a red or blue state. it’s as if all the minority party voters in presidential elections in the state didn’t vote at all. Their votes simply do not count in a Presidential election. This can’t be what the Framers intended.

Some voters have voted for every presidential election since the early 1990s, but state winner-take-all laws for electoral college votes have made sure not a SINGLE vote in their life for president has mattered because they are in the minority party in their state. They could have never voted for President, and still had the same impact. None.

A voter in one state can live less than a mile from another, with wildly different (if any) political relevance in a presidential general election.

With National Popular Vote,

Every vote in the country would actually count equally toward selecting the winner. Candidates would have an incentive to campaign in all states instead of ignoring 38 "safe" states and "lost cause" states. Millions of Republicans in California and New York could actually help elect a Republican President. Now their votes are meaningless because states award all their electoral voters to the statewide winner.

 

[Integrityrespec]

Over 80% of Democrats recognize the flaws in the Electoral College and support abolishing it in favor of a National Popular Vote. And 89% of those respondents want a constitutional amendment to get rid of it!

But the vast majority of Republicans oppose changing anything about it. They benefit from the Electoral College and its skewed representation – which means an amendment would never get through the 50-50 tied Senate.

That’s why the states have a plan to bypass Congress, ignore Mitch McConnell, and elect the popular vote winner directly.

It’s called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Let's make it law.

And how did they poll every democrat?

 

[mvymvy]

Because the national popular vote is irrelevant. Only the state popular vote matters.

Bills change how things work.

There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents states from making the decision now that winning the national popular vote is required to win the Electoral College and the presidency.

It is perfectly within a state’s authority to decide that national popularity is the overriding substantive criterion by which a president should be chosen.

The National Popular Vote bill simply again changes state statutes, using the same constitutional power for how existing state winner-take-all laws came into existence in 48 states in the first place.
Maine (only since enacting a state law in 1969) and Nebraska (only since enacting a state law in 1992) have awarded one electoral vote to the winner of each congressional district, and two electoral votes statewide.

The constitutional wording does not encourage, discourage, require, or prohibit the use of any particular method for awarding a state's electoral votes.

In the nation’s first presidential election in 1789 and second election in 1792, the states employed a wide variety of methods for choosing presidential electors, including

● appointment of the state’s presidential electors by the Governor and his Council,

● appointment by both houses of the state legislature,

● popular election using special single-member presidential-elector districts,

● popular election using counties as presidential-elector districts,

● popular election using congressional districts,

● popular election using multi-member regional districts,

● combinations of popular election and legislative choice,

● appointment of the state’s presidential electors by the Governor and his Council combined with the state legislature, and

● statewide popular election.

 

[mvymvy]

And how did they poll every democrat?

Opinion polls are usually designed to represent the opinions of a population by conducting a series of questions and then extrapolating generalities in ratio or within confidence intervals

The typical sample size for a Gallup poll is 1,000 national adults with a margin of error of ±4 percentage points.

 

[mvymvy]

LOL Duh. Of course the dems hate the EC ever since their chosen POTUS Hillary was defeated.

The National Popular Vote bill KEEPS the Electoral College.
It will guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate with the most national popular votes.

The current presidential election system of state winner-take-all laws (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states) “is a math equation, and its sole remaining impact on American politics is to magnify the political power of some Americans and reduce that of others. “ – Boston Globe, 7/6/20

“Let’s quit pretending there is some great benefit to the national good that allows the person with [fewer] votes to win the White House. Republicans have long said that they believe in competition. Let both parties compete for votes across the nation and stop disenfranchising voters by geography. The winner should win.” – Stuart Stevens (Romney presidential campaign top strategist)

When presidential candidates who more Americans voted for lose the Electoral College, the situation is unsustainable. This is how a government loses its legitimacy.

Unfair election systems can lead to politicians and their supporters who appreciate unfairness, which leads to more unfairness.

In Gallup polls since they started asking in 1944 until before the 2016 election, only about 20% of the public supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states) (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).

Support for a national popular vote for President has been strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in every state surveyed. In the 41 red, blue, and purple states surveyed, overall support has been in the 67-81% range - in rural states, in small states, in Southern and border states, in big states, and in other states polled.

21,461 choices and votes in 3 states were 329 times more important than the more than 7 million national vote lead in the country.

There were several scenarios in which a candidate could have won the presidency in 2020 with fewer popular votes than their opponents.

That could have reduced future turnout more, if more voters realized their votes do not matter.

Most Americans don't ultimately care whether their presidential candidate wins or loses in their state or district. Voters want to know, that no matter where they live, even if they were on the losing side, their vote actually was equally counted and mattered to their candidate. Most Americans think it is wrong that the candidate with the most popular votes can lose. It undermines the legitimacy of the electoral system. We don't allow this in any other election in our representative republic.

More than 3,522 state legislators among all 50 states have endorsed it.

The National Popular Vote bill was approved in 2016 by a unanimous bipartisan House committee vote in both Georgia (16 electoral votes) and Missouri (10).

Since 2006, the bill has passed 41 state legislative chambers in 25 rural, small, medium, large, Democratic, Republican and purple states with 283 electoral votes, including one house in Arizona (11), Arkansas (6), Maine (4), Michigan (15), Minnesota (10), North Carolina (16), Oklahoma (7) and Virginia (13), and both houses in Nevada (6).

 

[mvymvy]

We have no idea what future national popular vote outcomes would be or past national popular vote outcomes would have been if the campaigns had been run to win the national popular vote.

Smart candidates adapt their campaign strategies to the rules of the election in which they’re running.

You can’t assume that Trump wouldn’t have won the popular vote when he wasn’t trying, first and foremost, to win the popular vote.

Trump in June 2019 – Fox News interview
“It’s always tougher for the Republican because, . . . the Electoral College is very much steered to the Democrats. It’s a big advantage for the Democrats. It’s very much harder for the Republicans to win.”

Trump, April 26, 2018 on “Fox & Friends”
“I would rather have a popular election, but it’s a totally different campaign.”
“I would rather have the popular vote because it’s, to me, it’s much easier to win the popular vote.”

“I would rather have a popular vote. “
Trump, October 12, 2017 in Sean Hannity interview

As President, in late January 2017, Trump reportedly floated the idea of scrapping the Electoral College, according to The Wall Street Journal. In a meeting with congressional leadership at the White House. Trump reportedly told the lawmakers he wanted to replace the Electoral College with a national popular vote.

“I would rather see it, where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes, and somebody else gets 90 million votes, and you win. There’s a reason for doing this. Because it brings all the states into play.”
Trump as President-elect, November 13, 2016, on “60 Minutes”

"The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. . . . The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy."
In 2012, the night Romney lost, Trump tweeted.

In 1969, The U.S. House of Representatives voted 338–70 to require winning the national popular vote to become President.

3 Southern segregationist Senators led a filibuster of it.

Presidential candidates who supported direct election of the President in the form of a constitutional amendment, before the National Popular Vote bill was introduced: George H.W. Bush (R-TX), Bob Dole (R-KS), Gerald Ford (R-MI), Richard Nixon (R-CA),