General Discussion

customerserviceguy

(25,406 posts)

19. Yes, it has passed in a couple of red states in PARTS of the legislature

Fri Sep 8, 2017, 02:45 PM

Sep 2017

None of them has formally entered the compact all the way through.

Like I said, it will instantly seem like the wrong thing to do as soon as the "wrong" candidate gets a state's electoral votes. It would be far easier to get a Maine/Nebraska system in place, where EC electors are apportioned by Congressional districts, with the two extra EC votes representing the Senators going to the winner of the popular vote in a state. But if that happens, the GOP would probably run the table for the rest of American history.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

62 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The problem is not the electoral college itself. [View all] JayhawkSD Sep 2017 OP

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