Abolish the electoral college?

[ClydeR]

Should we abolish the electoral college? In 2012, when some people did not understand that the west coast would report its vote totals later than the east cost, it initially appeared that Obama won the electoral vote but lost the popular vote. At that time, Trump was in favor of abolishing the electoral college. Now that it is clear to everybody that the electoral college favors Republicans because voters in small population states currently like Republicans more than Democrats, Trump has reversed course.

Trump is saying in his Tweets that geographic location should determine the weight to be given to each person's vote. What do you think? Am I misstating Trump's position?

https://twitter.com/HelenKennedy/sta...93137414021120

Only five times in history did the presidency go to someone other than the winner of the popular vote. Only two of those times -- 2000 and 2016 -- are in the memory of anyone living today. The most contentious was 1824, which had the added drama that no candidate received the required majority of the electoral votes, sending the decision to the House, which awarded it to the candidate with the second most popular votes. Andrew Jackson had the majority popular vote in 1824. Jackson returned in 1828 to claim the office and reshape the nation's politics for the next 50 years.

[Methais]

Is this similar to how Obama “evolved” on gay marriage, which happened to be just in time for the 2012 election?

Also, shut up Fallen.

[kutter]

It does not matter what the coast want, it is a constitutional issue and there is no way they will get 38 states to ratify that amendment. And it is highly unlikely that the national popular vote interstate compact will stand up to constitutional muster when/if it is ever passed by enough states.

[Alfster]

It'll never pass.

[Gelston]

I'm more than happy for democrat states to switch their state constitutions to give all their votes to whoever wins the majority. Republicans weren't getting those electorals anyways, and it would be hilarious for me to see the tears from all the liberals when their plan backfires and their state goes red.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Wouldn't it require a super majority to amend the constitution?

[Gelston]

Wouldn't it require a super majority to amend the constitution?

The US Constitution? It requires 2/3rds in the House and Senate to propose, and then needs 38 states to ratify.

States can also bypass Congress and propose too with a 2/3rd vote at a Constitution Convention (this has never happened), which then requires 38 states to ratify aswell.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

The US Constitution? It requires 2/3rds in the House and Senate to propose, and then needs 38 states to ratify.

States can also bypass Congress and propose too with a 2/3rd vote at a Constitution Convention (this has never happened), which then requires 38 states to ratify aswell.

You said it much more clearly, but yeah, essentially it'll never ever happen.

[Gelston]

You said it much more clearly, but yeah, essentially it'll never ever happen.

I think the 2/3rds through Senate and House could be possible one day, but they'd never get 38 states. I don't think they'd get 10 states.

[Methais]

You said it much more clearly, but yeah, essentially it'll never ever happen.

BUT MUH POPULAR VOTE!!!!