After the change in 1914 or so, where selecting state senators moved from the state legislature to a popular vote,this would move us to direct democracy.
Sad, the founders understood the evil of mob rule.
ruefully
Al Gore Junior would not have won the 2000 election if we’d looked at the popular vote.
How can I say this? He had a 0.51% margin of victory over GW Bush. We would’ve needed the horrors of the Florida recount repeated across the entire country in every district.
There were many mail in ballots that were never counted in the presidential race because they made no difference to the electoral votes in those states.
And those contested military ballots in Florida were approved by the Florida Supremes but they were not included in Katherine Harris’ certified total (she held to the original count).
And certainly there was some vote fraud that could cause that sort of a margin (a hair over half of one percent).
We’d still be recounting 2000.
Kinda funny how Democrat states are proposing this and Bush won the popular vote in 2004.
I bet if they did pass (and were able to enforce) it they’d scream bloody murder when a Republican wins the popular vote.
These proponents were on WRKO Boston the other morning and discussed this at length. But the one question that never came up for these guys is I think THE most important: What about recounts? Would there be a national standard or individual state standards? If by state then would it break down by county commisioners like in Florida in 2000? If not then if a blue state like Massachusetts decides recount standards at a state level how would Republicans be ensured they would have a fair shake? Visa-versa for blue states.
First of all, nobody's "one vote" has ever meant anything in any presidential election--no state's popular vote has ever been decided by one vote. That's not why people vote.
Second, what's this crap about "every democracy in the world"? Not ever democracy in the world has a president, and those that do tend to have it as just a ceremonial position (e.g., Germany). There are lots of very democratic (small d) countries like Canada, Germany, the UK, etc., who elect their heads of government the way we do, by aggregating the votes in smaller subdivisions, so that the leader is often chosen despite lacking a majority, or even a plurality, of the popular vote.
Which explains why a) we're better than all of them, and b) why we are not a democracy.