Electoral  Votes.
The way it is now,  (Except Maine & Neb)
A  State, (48 of them,) depending on it’s  ‘total’ votes
Gives  ALL  of that  States, Electoral votes TO, the highest State Vote.

Take,  Calf,  55, Electoral votes.
A,  Safe  State for  the Democrats.
(Like Minn, where they have 10 Electoral votes)

In Calf, counties like LA, and SF,  Hugely Overwhelmed the % of votes.
(Surprising  S. Diego. was very close), of the State.

Out of the 58 Counties,  (this is stats from the 2012 election)
26  Counties, voted  R, and 32 voted  D.
(Don’t know where the District Lines are),

But think of this:
What If,  Calf was like Maine or  Neb.
(Where the, popular vote, carries the  Electoral vote, by how, THAT, District, votes.
And two Electoral Votes, are how the  State Votes)
So, 2 for the D, (By the State)
and say 2/3’s of  districts are D.  (=35  E.C. Votes)
But, 18, E.C. Votes, are  R.
(Yes  Lost, and the Troll, their is a  1/2,  Just rounded it off for example.)

So the final tally would have been,  D = 37  R = 18 /  Not,   D. = 55  &  R. =  0
( In Minn, (their 10 EC Votes), it would have been, a  5 - 5  split.)

Take JUST, those two States.  JUST those two, it would be:
D = 42.    R. = 23.   Rather  Significant difference between, 65-D / 0- R.

Now a  Lot of talk, about, doing Only the  Popular  Vote,
and a lota talk about staying the same.

Guess what,  Is  up to the  STATE,  to decide.
Yep the  STATE  !!!!!!!!
(Remember that little thing, about,  ’States  Rights”?)

The Electoral Collage  system, is,  IN  the Constitution.
So to take it out, would require a 2/3’s vote, and many years.
But  NOTHING, said of  HOW,  the  STATE,  decides how the E.C. Votes are decided.

So, you in N. Calf, get to work on it.
I will start in Minn.

Any Other people, gonna  put down the Pizza, turn off the T.V. and work on their State ?

ME/NE,  allocate two Electoral Votes to the popular vote winner in the  State, and then one each to the popular vote winner in each Congressional district in their State.

Did some research on this, and you may or may not like the results

http://www.occasionalplanet.org/2016/03/18/electoral-votes-awarded-proportion...

You'd have to get the Democratic states to switch and leave the Republican states as they are if you really want to rig the election into Republican favor.

If all the states do this, you actually end up with a more or less, popular vote outcome.  

from the link:
"Award electoral votes proportionally by state popular vote?

The other way to change how we vote for president would be for each state to change the way it instructs its electors vote. Forty-eight states require that all electors in their state vote for the candidate who received the largest popular vote in their state. The other two states, Maine and Nebraska, use a somewhat different system, which at most can only change one electoral vote for the entire state. However, if each of the states agreed to allot their electors proportionally to the popular vote in the state, we would have a completely different outcome from what normally happens in presidential elections. It would be very close to the outcome of a popular vote election:

2012 Electoral Vote: Obama 62%; Romney 38%

2012 Popular Vote: Obama 50%, Romney 49%

2012 Proportional Electoral Vote by State: Obama 51%, Romney 49%

Beneath these numbers is the reality that with proportional electoral voting by state, the outcome would be just one percent different from the popular vote. It would be much closer to the will of the people than the present Electoral College. It would clearly be a much more democratic process. However, this method would only work if all fifty states agreed to allocate their electors proportionally. The likelihood of that would be less than that of passing a constitutional amendment to abolish the Electoral College and replace it with the popular vote."

dig around some more and see what you think

LostArtist wrote on 11/02/16 at 19:58:53:

" ...  want to rig the election into Republican favor.

OH,  and if  you, 'have'  done, research.
Republicans, as a whole, are  NOT, in favor of the, 'Popular Vote', only.

But that's OK,  You are, 'Lost' !

MnSpring wrote on 11/02/16 at 20:17:45:


I never said they were, indeed I said you all were too chicken to let that happen, because you'd LOSE

we all know that republicans hate losers, their fearless leader tells them so

LostArtist wrote on 11/02/16 at 20:25:41:


And Calf, 'would' have been 35,  NOT   55.
Open your  EYES !

So Sorry, can't,  'Open your Eyes', for ya.

LostArtist wrote on 11/02/16 at 21:20:05:

but what you want is a rigged system,

What ever you say.

Guess the  school system you went to, does NOT  teach,   "Comprehension".

Keep  digging that hole.

 Later

? What will the electors do if Hilary wins the general election but gets indicted before they cast their vote in mid-December? It's a possibility like we've not seen before.

Everyone knows the Clinton Foundation is a shakedown organization, but what if Huma rolls over (or someone else) and hands over what we all know is out there but hidden? Would enough of the electors not vote for her knowing impeachment proceedings would begin the day she took office?

i'm not sure. If I recall, and I could be wrong, if the electorial college cannot give 270 votes to a candidate, the the House of Representatives selectes the President. Same for the Vice President.

So imagine justice is served and Hilary is dragged away in cuffs. I can't see 270 votes for that sack of potatoes Tim Kane. Would they hand it to Bernie? Can't see that. Would they enlist Biden? That I can imagine, he gets the office without the hassle of a campaign. But what if he really doesn't want it or they can't get 270? I can't see enough of the electors switching to Trump.

So then it goes to the Republican controlled House. President Paul Ryan? President Rubio? The Democratic electors could swallow that easier than President Trump.