Because they're suicidal? Because they're really useful idiots for the 'progressive agenda'? Could be either one. Time will tell.
Why Are Conservatives Supporting the National Popular Vote?
Supreme ignorance...
Riiiiiiggghhhhtt....I'm sure the good people of Wyoming, North Dakota, et al will be just thrilled at the jump in campaign activity. If you wrote this, you are delusional.
No true conservative would support this. Why? Because we tend to conserve institutions.
Going the NPV route would result in the political equivalent of "free beer" to New York, California, and a couple of other large states constituting an electoral majority. Can you not see that?
We don’t need a “magic wand” change to the process.
The underlying fundamental is the character and morals of the population. The more work that is done towards promoting a population of good character and morals, the more the voting process - even the current one - will result in candidates being elected who share the same good qualities.
I would support an amendment to allocate EVs by Congressional District (plus awarding the 2 senate seats by overall state winner) or by county.
Not the NPV though.
Because they are idiots. No one who calls himself "conservative" should support NPV because NPV was never the law of the land when it came to electing Presidents. Ever.
0bama is in serious trouble. The Democrats always throw out NPV as a "solution" to a "problem" (which of course doesn't exist) whenever they need helpful fraud in major cities to negate red state voters.
Don’t they realize that four liberal states would then control the country? It was fun explaining the electoral college to my Aussie mates.
Mob rule has always been a bad idea. The Founding Fathers knew what they were doing.
Anybody else see the supreme irony of that?
The real problem here is not merely that NPV gives disproportionate representation to the big population centers. It might even be possible to make a rational argument for that but only — and here is the real issue — if we intend to jettison the federal system and replace it with an even larger, more powerful, central government. That is the real agenda of the left. Centralized consolidation of power. NPV is just one of the means to achieve it.
The ultimate result would be to vastly extend the reach of vote fraud in the heavily populated blue states. That’s why the leftists are pushing the idea.
Every vote does count. Each state lets its voter determine how the state will cast its delegates in the national election. The separate sovereign states are the foundation of our Republic but the liberals can’t handle that. They want totalitarian central control.
The 10th Amendment has been raped for so long, most people are currently clueless as to what Federalism is and how it was meant to work.
Beyond that, I don’t believe this article for one minute. It is the liberals who are demanding an end to the electoral college, not conservatives.
A true conservative favors limiting the franchise to landowners and veterans.
Because you and anyone like you that went to a public school in the last 40 years are nothing short of communists!
When I went to school democracy was considered a swear word and the worst form of government that was ever thought of.
Ignorance!
I have NO clue. I can’t figure this one out.
I don’t know any Conservatives supporting “National Popular Vote.”
Almost by definition, if they ARE supporting it, they are not Conservative...
Because it is too easy to fool people these days. Republicans thought Trump was honest. Now they think Romeny and Perry are honest. It is too easy to fool people.
Under the current system, a President could be elected by a minority of the vote, but with a majority of the electoral votes. NPV would eliminate that, and in doing so, seriously undermine the concept of the confederation of states which, geographically and culturally, help make this country what it is.
Ultimately, NPV helps make majority tyranny easier, and as such all Americans should be opposed to it, on general principle.
How many of you would like to be ruled over by the liberal-soaked states such as New York, California, and Massachusetts? Under the NPV scenario, vast majorities in states like that could vote, say, 90%-10% for some "bocialist" candidate, while in the 45 or so remaining states, there could be a closer race, and yet, because of the lopsided majorities in the "liberal" states, the whole middle of the country would be ruled over by the "bocialists".
NO THANKS.
All you need to know about this system is that California will decide every election.
The End.
(And I’m a Californian.)