Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

brush

(61,033 posts)
6. Thanks for doing the work on the calculations, but since they line up with the popular vote...
Fri Sep 8, 2017, 11:52 AM
Sep 2017

why would we need the EC redundancy?

Just get rid of it.

It's an antiquated holdover that gave advantages to slave-holding states and now gives advantages to small, sparsely populated, repug states.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Duck, Jayhawk ProfessorGAC Sep 2017 #1
Great post PJMcK Sep 2017 #2
If you are going to give out percentages, padfun Sep 2017 #3
Here's Why I Think It's Salable ProfessorGAC Sep 2017 #13
Playing the Devil's Advocate for a moment Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #20
No, That's Fair ProfessorGAC Sep 2017 #39
NPV does Not take an Amendment & Is Supported by Small staters mvymvy Sep 2017 #41
You Sure? ProfessorGAC Sep 2017 #42
States are enacting the bill mvymvy Sep 2017 #44
Because it still gives small states more power. tinrobot Sep 2017 #33
The EC is no different than grading kids on a curve randr Sep 2017 #4
It's more screwed up than that. yallerdawg Sep 2017 #5
If only there was another house of congress... Baconator Sep 2017 #55
The house that's gerrymandered to the point... yallerdawg Sep 2017 #59
Then the issue is with gerrymandering... Baconator Sep 2017 #62
Thanks for doing the work on the calculations, but since they line up with the popular vote... brush Sep 2017 #6
3% of U.S. could stop Amendment mvymvy Sep 2017 #16
Thanks for that. That makes sense. brush Sep 2017 #17
There is at least 1 move to modify it without the Amendment route to ditch it UTUSN Sep 2017 #7
That will work fine until customerserviceguy Sep 2017 #9
Withdrawal is not possible until after Inauguration mvymvy Sep 2017 #12
Perhaps so customerserviceguy Sep 2017 #18
Passed in red, blue and purple states mvymvy Sep 2017 #15
Yes, it has passed in a couple of red states in PARTS of the legislature customerserviceguy Sep 2017 #19
77% of Maine voters and 74% of Nebraska voters support a national popular vote. mvymvy Sep 2017 #23
Maine and Nebraska customerserviceguy Sep 2017 #24
Well, if you say so . . . But mvymvy Sep 2017 #37
They won't just drop out, they'll sue. hughee99 Sep 2017 #54
The other way would be by congressional district...have you heard about a little thing called Demsrule86 Sep 2017 #8
I don't see it happening customerserviceguy Sep 2017 #10
It certainly could happen. In fact that would be a way for the GOP to retain power and it has been Demsrule86 Sep 2017 #31
Congress would have decided 2016 election mvymvy Sep 2017 #11
Yes, Wyoming would have as much a say in who won as California customerserviceguy Sep 2017 #21
Obama would have been elected following the new rules as well. padfun Sep 2017 #25
So so "ancient rules" & not designed by Founders mvymvy Sep 2017 #34
Wyoming already has more of a say per capita than California does Orrex Sep 2017 #46
The same can be said of Wyoming's representation in the US Senate customerserviceguy Sep 2017 #48
National Popular Vote bill does not change anything in Constitution mvymvy Sep 2017 #50
I was commenting on customerserviceguy Sep 2017 #57
No, it's not the same thing. Orrex Sep 2017 #52
Whether it should or shouldn't customerserviceguy Sep 2017 #58
3% of U.S. could stop Amendment to abolish mvymvy Sep 2017 #60
Yes! That's the bill I was trying to remember Orrex Sep 2017 #61
The constitution does specify the states say how they choose their electors muriel_volestrangler Sep 2017 #14
38 states are politically irrelevant in presidential general elections mvymvy Sep 2017 #35
In the 1960 election, the swing states were Illinois and Texas oberliner Sep 2017 #43
Many states have not been competitive for more than a half-century mvymvy Sep 2017 #45
There are no states that have not been competitive for more than half a century oberliner Sep 2017 #47
One thing we need to be aware of folks... Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #22
Yes, that is why the coalition of states. padfun Sep 2017 #26
But that won't be the only measure moving forward. Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #27
I know. Like you said, padfun Sep 2017 #28
That's their plan to "gerrymander" the EC bigbrother05 Sep 2017 #29
"...if all states allocated their electoral votes based on the percentage of the popular vote..." Iggo Sep 2017 #30
Proportional would not be the same as winning by national popular vote mvymvy Sep 2017 #36
Here's my beef with the EC TexasBushwhacker Sep 2017 #32
Thank you! ProudLib72 Sep 2017 #38
I doubt they'd proportion votes like that. Calista241 Sep 2017 #40
I've been proposing something similar MurrayDelph Sep 2017 #49
One person, One vote mvymvy Sep 2017 #51
Recommended. guillaumeb Sep 2017 #53
there has been a push to do just that. shanny Sep 2017 #56
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The problem is not the el...»Reply #6