Do you think the idea of abolishing the electoral college will ever gain enough traction to become a reality???
Abolishing would require a constitutional amendment, and the likelihood of that happening is slim to none.
What may happen is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Look it up to see what it is. If that happens the electoral college is essentially dead without a constitutional amendment. And that's a terrifying prospect as it essentially means New York and California will have the most power in electing presidents.
Federal Courts disagree with National Popular Vote Interstate Compact so far.
A voter in Montana has more power (by many times) than a voter in California or NY.
To borrow a quote of a great author: "We're all equal. But some are more equal than others."
Perhaps the GOP tune on electoral college will change when the landscape changes:
https://www.politico.com/
And a voter in Montana has much more senate representation than a voter in California and New York. Every state has two senators regardless of population.
The framers had well reasoned thoughts for this. Do you understand why? After all the discussions here on the forum, you should. If not, you choose not to.
As far as Pubs wanting to change the rules when they work against them, I can't think of any examples of such in the past.. Unlike our leftist friends, who constantly exhibit examples. The constitution is "A Living Document" after all, that means what they want it to mean when they want it to mean what they want it to mean.
An individual voter in Montana will have more power with their individual vote than an individual voter in California, this is true.
It is also very much true that the same Montana voter is more represented at the federal level. This all comes down to representation by overall population concentration.
What I am trying to point out by saying New York and California have massive electoral college power comes down to this. California and New York are two of the largest population centers in the United States, and electoral college votes are apportioned by state population. This is because a states electoral college votes are equal to the total representation of each state.
Each state is guaranteed 2 senators and at least 1 house representative, so at a minimum any state will have 3 EC votes. But lets look at some more numbers.
Montana's entire population (quick google search) is estimated to be around 1,062,000 in 2019. California has a statewide population estimated to be 39,865,000 in 2019.
As another comparison, the city of San Francisco, CA has an estimated resident population of ~883,305 residents. That's just 1 city in California and it's not that far behind the entire combined population estimate of Montana.
California has the highest population by state of any US state and we control 53 seats in the house. Plus our two senators means we get 55 EC votes. This beats the next largest state (Texas with 38 EC votes) by 17 EC votes. The point here is that California holds enormous power in deciding presidents and unfortunately California is nowhere close to being a swing state. It is so far dead set blue that most republican presidential candidates often don't bother coming here to campaign. Or if they do they don't stay long. The flip side is also true. California is such a sure bet blue state that most Democrat candidates don't spend much time campaigning here.
It is often said and I often feel it is true that my one vote in California means absolutely nothing. I'm 1 vote out of nearly 40 million (less than that because we really need voting population numbers and I didn't go looking for those).
Regarding the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, yes it's true that it has been challenged in court and the general consensus is that it is un-constitutional, but that also hasn't stopped states from voting on signing it. California has voted in favor of signing it.
As far as the popular vote, I wonder what sort of people vote for a governor who tells them "Hey, we want to give your presidential vote to California", which is essentially what they are doing.
I don't care how much momentum it has, it will not gain enough for an amendment and until it does, it's unconstitutional and any court will strike it down.
I don't often speak i memes, but this one just seems like a fit :-)
Thanks Tim,
Then I guess that you might think it was funny that I would eat at Subway every day of the year and order the same roast beef sandwich, triple toasted with all the veggies(and that Taco Bell would have been my choice, mainly because of price and speed).
https://www.usmagazine.com/food/news/taco-bell-voted-the-best-mexican-restaurant-in-the-country/