Posted on 11/13/2016 12:05:45 PM PST by mdittmar
If it were abolished the only states that would determine who would win or lose is CA, TX, and NY. It would the only states where the candidates would campaign.
Of course not; it’s an utterly lamebrained and moronic idea.
To do that you need universal voter laws among the states. There should be positive voter verification.
this system is designed to allow people in rural areas
to have as much influence as city dwellers.
Whether he did or not is moot. What people don’t seem to understand is that the campaigning is done BASED ON CAPTURING THE ELECTORAL VOTE and not the popular vote. If the goal was to get the popular vote, the campaigns would run DIFFERENTLY. Strategy would be DIFFERENT.
Trump spent very little time campaigning in CA and almost nothing on local TV here. If the popular vote was the goal, he would have spent more time here — not expecting to win a majority but to pare away millions of Clinton votes. Since the electoral votes were a lost cause in CA, more time and money here would have been wasted.
2/3 majority of both Houses of Congress followed by ratification by 3/4 of state legislatures. Why should small states give up that much power?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.