[jimjohn]

Reality to Dukakis: that would take a constitutional amendment that would have to be ratified by 38 states. So remind me, how many states did Hillary win again?

[scbison]

how would they even begin.. dems control only 13 State legislatures. Yea dems, go ahead and make this your top priority...

[jjotto]

heh heh

Dukakis LOST 40 states!

[x]

Democrats start working on this now. It may take them as long to get rid of the Electoral College as it did for Britain's Labour Party to end hereditary legislators in the House of Lords -- eighty years or so -- and it may mean renouncing other goals, as Tony Blair did for Labour in Britain. But if there's ever a massive landslide for the Democrats again, abolition of the Electoral College will be on the table. Of course, there's a paradox involved here. A party that is powerful enough to get rid of the EC will have swept the EC to get into office and therefore won't feel any pressing need for change.

Could an amendment get ratified by the states? Naturally, big Democrat states would be for it. So would small Democrat states -- Hawaii, Vermont, Delaware, Rhode Island, if the political map stays the same. Die-hard small Republican states would be opposed -- Idaho, Wyoming, the Dakotas. You'd have to see a sweep for the Democrats so big that enough Midwestern and Southern state legislatures go Democrat long enough for the Amendment to go through. That's extremely unlikely the way our politics are now. Maybe FDR could have done it during the Depression if he'd wanted to.

[FreeAtlanta]

That is what I keep telling these losers. The electoral college protects the smaller population states.

Do you think there would be enough of them to commit suicide?

[Bshaw]

“Reality to Dukakis: that would take a constitutional amendment that would have to be ratified by 38 states. So remind me, how many states did Hillary win again?”

Exactly. Math is clearly not Dukakis’ strong subject....