[Gluteus Maximus]

My prediction: there won’t be a presidential election in 2020. At least not in a country configured as the USA is now.

[Telepathic Intruder]

A popular vote will only further reduce the significance of individual states in contrast to one big state.

[mulligan]

If so, the nation will be at the end of the road.

[W.]

How about each state [50, screw DC] gets ONE vote for President. Whichever candidate wins the popular vote in that state gets that state’s vote. At least that would negate the big liberal states giving an unfair amount of electoral votes to any one candidate. Or is that too easy?

[fhayek]

Then it will be cities, cities, cities. No politician will step foot in a rural state. Not worth the effort. Who can give the most money to the most cities (and the Urban dwellers therein)? That’s what presidential elections will look like.

[Theodore R.]

All of those eleven states constitute one mega-Democrat state; this changes nothing thus far.

[al_c]

What has happened to this country?

[Jim from C-Town]

What a waste of time. In most instances the winner of the popular vote IS the winner of the electoral college. As a matter of fact, the Electoral College causes a landslide in some instances where the popular vote is actually much closer.

The electoral college protects the small states. Without it there would be an uprising from many les populous states.

[ExCTCitizen]

Liberals are always trying to rob the little guys, and the latest is this. We need to stop the popular vote drive, and reform election laws.

[Nero Germanicus]

Under the current system the Democrats only need to win in 14 states (all won by Obama in 2012) plus the District of Columbia to get to the required 270 electoral votes.
California: 55 Electoral votes (60% Obama in 2012)
New York: 29 (63% Obama)
Florida: 29 (50% Obama)
Illinois: 20 (58% Obama)
Pennsylvania: 20 (52% Obama)
Ohio: 18 (51% Obama)
Michigan: 16 (54% Obama)
New Jersey: 14 (58% Obama)
Virginia: 13 (51% Obama)
Washington: 12 (53% Obama)
Massachusetts: 11 (61% Obama)
Maryland: 10 (62% Obama)
Minnesota: 10 (53% Obama)
Wisconsin: 10 (53% Obama)
District of Columbia: 3 (91% Obama)
Total: 270 via 14 states & D.C.

[Nero Germanicus]

Under the current system the Democrats only need to win in 14 states (all won by Obama in 2012) plus the District of Columbia to get to the required 270 electoral votes.
California: 55 Electoral votes (60% Obama in 2012)
New York: 29 (63% Obama)
Florida: 29 (50% Obama)
Illinois: 20 (58% Obama)
Pennsylvania: 20 (52% Obama)
Ohio: 18 (51% Obama)
Michigan: 16 (54% Obama)
New Jersey: 14 (58% Obama)
Virginia: 13 (51% Obama)
Washington: 12 (53% Obama)
Massachusetts: 11 (61% Obama)
Maryland: 10 (62% Obama)
Minnesota: 10 (53% Obama)
Wisconsin: 10 (53% Obama)
District of Columbia: 3 (91% Obama)
Total: 270 via 14 states & D.C.

[Organic Panic]

So democrats ARE planning illegals granted amnesty to get the vote even if they aren’t granted full citizenship right off the bat. Illegals granted amnesty will be given the right to vote, legal or not, then rushed through before anytime to recount or verify actual legal votes. The country is toast. Ride the wave and stay under the radar.

[Vermont Lt]

This will work until a republican gets a majority.

It will be hilarious to see how fast they change the laws back.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

And the butt-[censored] of our Constitution continues . . .

Combined General and Maryland “Freak State” PING!

[Impy]

Nope.

Only solid rat states have passed that stupid pact.

I challenge them to change it and have it go in effect in 2016 rather than whenever enough states pass it (which will be never).

I’d love to see Hawaii and Vermont forced to cast their electoral votes for a Republican, should one win the 2016 popular vote.