True. Maine and Nebraska award electoral votes based on congressional district. Every other state could do that if they wanted to. Each state decides how to award their electoral votes. 48 of 50 states do it winner take all, but there no requirement that they do so.
It would be nice if people knew what they were talking about and how the system works before they call for getting rid of it.
The people in power who want to get rid of it know exactly how it works, I think. This is one step closer to Federalizing the elections and further diminishing the power of states.
We used to appoint senators at the state legislature level, however a state chose to do it, they'd send two senators. Now it's popular vote in the state, per amendment, and that took a chunk of state power and changed the balance of power.
Democrats want “democracy” as long as it's run from a monolithic powerful central point.
Last time I figured it out, if we went strictly by popular vote, candidates would campaign in about 100 counties (maybe it was 150) and the rest would not count or matter.
If you added up several of the Western states the population there would not equal that of LA County- get 80% of the vote in LA county, and NM, MO, WY, ID, UT couldn't match that at 100%.
You have to think that they are just playing to the dupes in their constituency when they spout BS like this.
One, it would require a constitutional amendment in which at least 10? states would have to vote against their own interests.
Two, they know that the Senate and House are apportioned based on the same concept that the EC is apportioned.
(It was funny when I made this argument to a lib, and they didn’t have a CLUE as to what I was talking about.)