That’s not exactly true. Each state could choose to give their votes to the candidate that wins the national vote. Then the electoral college system would still exist on paper but in reality wouldn’t be relevant to the outcome.
I think it would be better to amend the Constitution. But it’s not the only way to make popular vote reality.
That sounds scary, but you gotta be precise. Trump was trying to do that after the fact, which would be a coup d’etat. In reality, many states have reasonably made changes over time before elections. Did you know that two states aren’t winner-take-all, and that this has changed over time? Wild!
I was hoping for more from you. You wrote something that sounded scary but was actually misleading. You could have corrected yourself, because there’s value to what you were trying to communicate. Facts are important, my friend.
I can see you have long term feelings. I do not. I wasn’t attempting to scare, I simply stated the truth. As such, there is nothing to “correct”, as you say. I suggest you go on your merry way, as will I.
So is a method to change the Constitution.
That really is the only way to get rid of the electoral college.
That’s not exactly true. Each state could choose to give their votes to the candidate that wins the national vote. Then the electoral college system would still exist on paper but in reality wouldn’t be relevant to the outcome.
I think it would be better to amend the Constitution. But it’s not the only way to make popular vote reality.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
The states changing their electors outside their popular vote is exactly what Trump was trying to do.
And they’re gearing up for version 2.0. Shit’s gonna get weird in a few months.
That sounds scary, but you gotta be precise. Trump was trying to do that after the fact, which would be a coup d’etat. In reality, many states have reasonably made changes over time before elections. Did you know that two states aren’t winner-take-all, and that this has changed over time? Wild!
Nice try
I was hoping for more from you. You wrote something that sounded scary but was actually misleading. You could have corrected yourself, because there’s value to what you were trying to communicate. Facts are important, my friend.
I can see you have long term feelings. I do not. I wasn’t attempting to scare, I simply stated the truth. As such, there is nothing to “correct”, as you say. I suggest you go on your merry way, as will I.
Are you suggesting with say…an amendment?
Or we could ratio it out of existence. If we had 10,000 representatives then the EC would match the popular vote results.