Nevada set to join NPVIC (UPDATE: vetoed by idiot governor)

[7,052,770]

Election 2024: In his reelection bid, Bernie Sanders loses the national popular vote to Louie Gohmert, but edges him out in the electoral college loses 538-0 thanks to the NPVIC.

No question that I support abolishing the Electoral College, but don't you just know something like that would happen? I doubt there is any real way to enact "the Electoral College is abolished, but the first two times Democrats lose the popular vote but would have won the electoral vote, it's temporarily reinstated as retribution for 2000 and 2016."

[7,052,770]

Funny how you rarely heard Democrats whining about the electoral college before the 2016 election when they deluded themselves into believing in the "blue wall"

I predict this whole campaign will fall apart if Trump wins the popular vote in 2020

What? Democrats have been pretty loud about this at least since 2000, and to some extent long before.  I remember hearing a lot about it in elementary school in the 1990s, and back then it had some Republican support too.

[7,052,770]

Amazing how Hillary's defeat made the far left go absolutely insane.

This is a particularly poor example to use for the point you're trying to make. The House actually passed an amendment abolishing it 50 years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_abolition_amendment

[7,052,770]

So if you support the Electoral College, why does Hillary even get Illinois's Electoral Votes?

I allocated Electoral Votes to each Illinois county based on population, where all counties are guaranteed at least 3. I used 538, although any number is fine and doesn't change the final outcome. Even though Hillary gets 122 EVs from Cook County, Trump wins 301-237.

It's literally impossible argue that a National Popular Vote is detrimental to rural interests but then be totally fine with state's electoral votes not also being chosen by such a system. Why don't you demand that rural Illinois farmers be able to overrule higher population Chicago and give Illinois's votes to Trump?

[7,052,770]

Here's the overlooked argument: there does not exist one national presidential election run by the federal government every fourth November. There exist fifty-one presidential elections run by the states and DC independently, each with their own laws concerning voting rights and ballot access. The slate of candidates is not uniform across states, nor is franchise uniformly distributed. There have been elections where not all of the major party candidates are allowed on the ballot in each state (e.g. Alabama 1964). If states can remove major candidates, they can, if large enough, single-handledly decide the popular vote by themselves. We would need an amendment federalizing the administration of presidential elections in order to ensure the national popular vote is anything but an easily-rigged farce.

I don't think that's really "overlooked." Definitely true, I just think we're all aware. Gotta have the same ballot for all 50 states.

[7,052,770]

I really don't see why people think scrapping the EC is an outrageous idea... it's clearly an outdated system that was originally intended to keep the interests of white rich landowning guys in the WH....

Fine since this is most people's beef with the EC...here's my compromise: The presidential winner is the one who wins the popular majority...of the most states.  No EC numbers, no delegates.

You just to win the popular majority in 26 or more of the 50 states.  And looking back at the last few elections, we would've had the same winners each time.

But no you won't like that, because Wyoming would be the most powerful and the masses in Cali wouldn't.  Well, that balances out what happens in the House, doesn't it?

Why not whoever wins the most counties? Because the statewide winners are just going to be determined by the big metro areas in every state.

Or why not whoever wins the most precincts? Because the countywide winners are just going to be determined by the biggest precincts in each county...