Donald Trump winning the presidential election in 2016 caused Democrats across the country to hate the Electoral College. The country has been using the Electoral College for centuries as it ensures that all states are able to contribute toward the election process. Otherwise, the popular vote would mean that only California, NYC, and a few other heavily populated areas would be voting for the president.

The problem is that Trump won the vote with the Electoral College while Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. If the Electoral College wasn’t around, Clinton would be the President of the United States right now.

The Democrats see getting rid of the Electoral College as the solution to prevent Trump and other Republicans from ever setting foot inside of the Oval Office ever again. The problem with that, however, is that most of the country wants the Electoral College around because they want their vote to count.

Elizabeth Warren has been a huge advocate of getting rid of the Electoral College. She has announced plans that, if elected president, she would like to see it gone completely by the 2024 election, meaning that she would be the last president elected by it.

The Massachusetts Senator released a video on social media on Sunday night discussing her goal of removing the Electoral College within her first term.

She was very open and honest about her goals, identifying that she wants to be elected and become the last American president who is elected by the Electoral College. She made this announcement amidst applauding supporters. Warren went even further by identifying that her goal is not simply to be elected as president. She is planning for a second term already, too. In the video, she said that her second term will be elected by direct vote, correcting herself to announce the popular vote.

Warren believes that getting rid of the Electoral College would allow democracy to work properly. She says to call her “old-fashioned” but she thinks the person who gets the most votes should win the election.

The problem is that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote with a little over 65 million voters while Trump only had 62 million votes. However, Trump won more states, including Florida, Texas, Tennessee, Montana, and many others. However, these are not the most heavily populated areas. California, New York, Nevada, and other states voted for Clinton. Due to their heavy populations, Clinton won the popular vote.

By Warren saying what she is saying, she is essentially saying that she thinks the states with the largest populations should decide who the president of the United States should be. The reason that the Electoral College was created in the first place was to make it fair. It’s the same reason why every state has two senators and why every state gets the number of representatives that they do based on population. It’s all about checks and balances, but Warren doesn’t believe that checks and balances are part of a democracy, obviously.

As Trent England, the director of Save Our States project explained, the Electoral College makes it difficult to win the presidency. He explains that the Electoral College requires a geographic balance to protect Americans so that their voices are not ignored.

In many instances, a candidate will win both the popular vote and the Electoral College vote. This is why, in most election years, it isn’t a big deal. However, there have been a few occasions where the president was elected based solely on the Electoral College as opposed to the popular vote – and Trump was one of those instances. With not getting Hillary Clinton in the White House in 2016, it is one of the top reasons why Democrats want to get rid of the Electoral College once and for all.

Elizabeth Warren may not be able to get her timeline, however. Using electors to pick the president is part of the Constitution. This would require a constitutional amendment, something that doesn’t happen easily. There are built-in safeguards to ensure that highly populated states don’t get to call all of the shots. In order for Warren to get her way, it would require two-thirds support from the Senate or state legislatures. Then, it would need three-fourths of the state legislatures to approve it for ratification.

While there are some people who would like to see the Electoral College be killed off once and for all, it would be extremely difficult – which means that Warren is spouting yet another improbable things that she will do if elected simply to get people on her side.

49 thoughts on “Warren Comes Out Swinging Over Electoral College

  1. Trump, October 12, 2017 in Sean Hannity interview
    “I would rather have a popular vote. “

    Trump, November 13, 2016, on “60 Minutes”
    “ I would rather see it, where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes, and somebody else gets 90 million votes, and you win. There’s a reason for doing this. Because it brings all the states into play.”

    In 2012, the night Romney lost, Trump tweeted.
    “The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. . . . The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.”

    In 1969, The U.S. House of Representatives voted for a national popular vote by a 338–70 margin.

    Presidential candidates who supported direct election of the President in the form of a constitutional amendment, before the National Popular Vote bill was introduced: George H.W. Bush (R-TX-1969), Bob Dole (R-KS-1969), Gerald Ford (R-MI-1969), Richard Nixon (R-CA-1969), Jimmy Carter (D-GA-1977), and Hillary Clinton (D-NY-2001).

    Past presidential candidates with a public record of support, before November 2016, for the National Popular Vote bill that would guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate with the most national popular votes: Bob Barr (Libertarian- GA), U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R–GA), Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), and Senator Fred Thompson (R–TN),

    Newt Gingrich summarized his support for the National Popular Vote bill by saying: “No one should become president of the United States without speaking to the needs and hopes of Americans in all 50 states. … America would be better served with a presidential election process that treated citizens across the country equally. The National Popular Vote bill accomplishes this in a manner consistent with the Constitution and with our fundamental democratic principles.”

    Eight former national chairs of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) have endorsed the bill

    1. BS !!!! Can you imagine what this country would be like if the chumps in NYC and cali-gay-fornia elected our Presidents — can you spell DISASTER !!!!!! Both places would have millions on top of millions of illegals voting. The electorial college keeps it country wide and that is the way it should be. We need to take both nyc and california and dump them into their respective oceans.

      1. 5,187,019 Californians live in rural areas.
        1,366,760 New Yorkers live in rural areas.

        Now, because of statewide winner-take-all laws for awarding electors, minority party voters in the states don’t matter.

        California and New York state together would not dominate the choice of President under National Popular Vote because there is an equally populous group of Republican states (with 58 million people) that gave Trump a similar percentage of their vote (60%) and a similar popular-vote margin (6 million).

        In 2016, New York state and California Democrats together cast 9.7% of the total national popular vote.

        California & New York state account for 16.7% of the voting-eligible population

        Alone, they could not determine the presidency.

        In total New York state and California cast 16% of the total national popular vote

        In total, Florida, Texas, and Pennsylvania cast 18% of the total national popular vote.
        Trump won those states.

        The vote margin in California and New York wouldn’t have put Clinton over the top in the popular vote total without the additional 60 million votes she received in other states.

        In 2004, among the four largest states, the two largest Republican states (Texas and Florida) generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Bush, while the two largest Democratic states generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Kerry.

        New York state and California together cast 15.7% of the national popular vote in 2012.
        About 62% Democratic in CA, and 64% in NY.

        New York and California have 15.6% of Electoral College votes. Now that proportion is all reliably Democratic.

        Under a popular-vote system CA and NY would have less weight than under the current system because their popular votes would be diluted among candidates.

      2. “The only real solution is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. The compact, which is completely different from what national Democrats talk about and does not abolish the Electoral College, would negate the impact of illegal immigrants in California and other sanctuary states. . . . This fully constitutional reform would do away with the built-in advantage Democrats have because only citizens can vote. . . . [C]onservatives and Republicans would actually benefit from the compact. . . . Republicans will have a better chance of winning presidential elections. Republicans will switch their strategy to focus on the red areas where people currently don’t bother voting since they’re not located in one of the 12 swing states.
        The demographics in the swing states are changing. They’re becoming more Democratic and the numbers of illegal immigrants are increasing. If we keep going with the current system, Republicans will eventually be unable to win the presidency. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is an idea whose time has come.” – Rachel Alexander, Enter Stage Right

        Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution mandates the U.S. Census count every resident in the United States.

        The current system gives “illegal immigrants” a 10 vote advantage in the Electoral College for the Democrats…because they tend to live in safe Democratic states.

        An election for President based on the nationwide popular vote would eliminate the Democrat’s advantage in Electoral College members arising from the uneven distribution of non-citizens.

        Federal law prohibits aliens from voting for President. 18 United States Code section 611 states:
        “It shall be unlawful for any alien to vote in any election held solely or in part for the purpose of electing a candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives …”

  2. With current statewide winner-take-all laws, a presidential candidate could lose despite winning 78%+ of the popular vote and 39 smaller states.

    With the current state-by-state winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), it could only take winning a bare plurality of popular votes in only the 11 most populous states, containing 56% of the population of the United States, for a candidate to win the Presidency with less than 22% of the nation’s votes!

    But the political reality is that the 11 largest states, with a majority of the U.S. population and electoral votes, rarely agree on any political candidate. In 2016, among the 11 largest states: 7 voted Republican(Texas, Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Georgia) and 4 voted Democratic (California, New York, Illinois, and New Jersey). The big states are just about as closely divided as the rest of the country. For example, among the four largest states, the two largest Republican states (Texas and Florida) generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Bush, while the two largest Democratic states generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Kerry.

    With National Popular Vote, it’s not the size of any given state, it’s the size of their “margin” that will matter. Under a national popular vote, the margin of your loss within a state matters as much as the size of your win.

    In 2004, among the 11 most populous states, in the seven non-battleground states, % of winning party, and margin of “wasted” popular votes, from among the total 122 Million votes cast nationally:
    * Texas (62% R), 1,691,267
    * New York (59% D), 1,192,436
    * Georgia (58% R), 544,634
    * North Carolina (56% R), 426,778
    * California (55% D), 1,023,560
    * Illinois (55% D), 513,342
    * New Jersey (53% D), 211,826

    To put these numbers in perspective,
    Oklahoma (7 electoral votes) generated a margin of 455,000 “wasted” votes for Bush in 2004 — larger than the margin generated by the 9th and 10th largest states, namely New Jersey and North Carolina (each with 15 electoral votes).
    Utah (5 electoral votes) generated a margin of 385,000 “wasted” votes for Bush in 2004.
    8 small western states, with less than a third of California’s population, provided Bush with a bigger margin (1,283,076) than California provided Kerry (1,235,659).

  3. Nevada is not a heavily populated state.

    5,187,019 Californians live in rural areas.
    1,366,760 New Yorkers live in rural areas.

    Now, because of statewide winner-take-all laws for awarding electors, minority party voters in the states don’t matter.

    California and New York state together would not dominate the choice of President under National Popular Vote because there is an equally populous group of Republican states (with 58 million people) that gave Trump a similar percentage of their vote (60%) and a similar popular-vote margin (6 million).

    In 2016, New York state and California Democrats together cast 9.7% of the total national popular vote.

    California & New York state account for 16.7% of the voting-eligible population

    Alone, they could not determine the presidency.

    In total New York state and California cast 16% of the total national popular vote

    In total, Florida, Texas, and Pennsylvania cast 18% of the total national popular vote.
    Trump won those states.

    The vote margin in California and New York wouldn’t have put Clinton over the top in the popular vote total without the additional 60 million votes she received in other states.

    In 2004, among the four largest states, the two largest Republican states (Texas and Florida) generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Bush, while the two largest Democratic states generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Kerry.

    New York state and California together cast 15.7% of the national popular vote in 2012.
    About 62% Democratic in CA, and 64% in NY.

    New York and California have 15.6% of Electoral College votes. Now that proportion is all reliably Democratic.

    Under a popular-vote system CA and NY would have less weight than under the current system because their popular votes would be diluted among candidates

  4. “ Let’s quit pretending there is some great benefit to the national good that allows the person with [fewer] votes to win the White House. Republicans have long said that they believe in competition. Let both parties compete for votes across the nation and stop disenfranchising voters by geography. The winner should win.” – Stuart Stevens (Republican)

    In Gallup polls since they started asking in 1944 until the 2016 election, only about 20% of the public supported the current system of awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states) (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).

    When asked the simple question “Do you think the person who wins the most votes nationwide should become the president?” 74% of all Americans surveyed say yes.

    Support for a national popular vote for President has been strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in every state surveyed. In the 41 red, blue, and purple states surveyed, overall support has been in the 67-81% range – in rural states, in small states, in Southern and border states, in big states, and in other states polled.

    There are several scenarios in which a candidate could win the presidency in 2020 with fewer popular votes than their opponents. It could reduce turnout more, as more voters realize their votes do not matter.

    Most Americans don’t ultimately care whether their presidential candidate wins or loses in their state or district. Voters want to know, that no matter where they live, even if they were on the losing side, their vote actually was equally counted and mattered to their candidate. Most Americans think it is wrong that the candidate with the most popular votes can lose. It undermines the legitimacy of the electoral system. We don’t allow this in any other election in our representative republic.

    The National Popular Vote bill was approved in 2016 by a unanimous bipartisan House committee vote in both Georgia (16 electoral votes) and Missouri (10).

    Since 2006, the bill has passed 40 state legislative chambers in 24 rural, small, medium, large, Democratic, Republican and purple states with 271 electoral votes, including one house in Arizona (11), Arkansas (6), Maine (4), Michigan (16), Minnesota (10), North Carolina (15), and Oklahoma (7), and both houses in Nevada (6).
    The bill has been enacted by 16 small, medium, and large jurisdictions with 196 electoral votes – 73% of the way to guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate with the most national popular votes.

    When enacted by states with 270 electoral votes, it would change state winner-take-all laws (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), in the enacting states, without changing anything in the Constitution, using the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes.

  5. Tell this “whatever she is” that she is NOT honoring her oath of office to support this constitution, Article 6, clause 3. About half the Senate is not and all gun controllers definitely are not. Pelosi acts like she never took an oath. The Squab had their fingers crossed when they “tooK” it.

    1. Being a constitutional republic does not mean we should not and cannot guarantee the election of the presidential candidate with the most popular votes. The candidate with the most votes wins in every other election in the country.

      Guaranteeing the election of the presidential candidate with the most popular votes and the majority of Electoral College votes (as the National Popular Vote bill would) would not make us a pure democracy.
      Popular election of the chief executive does not determine whether a government is a republic or democracy. It is not rule by referendum.

      Pure democracy is a form of government in which people vote on all policy initiatives directly.

      We would not be doing away with the Electoral College, U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives, state legislatures, etc. etc. etc.

      The presidential election system, using the 48 state winner-take-all method or district winner method of awarding electoral votes used by 2 states, that we have today was not designed, anticipated, or favored by the Founding Fathers. It is the product of decades of change precipitated by the emergence of political parties and enactment by states of winner-take-all or district winner laws, not mentioned, much less endorsed, in the Constitution.

      The Constitution does not encourage, discourage, require, or prohibit the use of any particular method for how to award a state’s electoral votes

      The National Popular Vote bill is 73% of the way to guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the country, by changing state winner-take-all laws (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), without changing anything in the Constitution, using the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes.

      The bill retains the constitutionally mandated Electoral College and state control of elections, and uses the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes. It ensures that every voter is equal, every voter will matter, in every state, in every presidential election, and the candidate with the most votes wins, as in virtually every other election in the country.

      Every voter, everywhere, for every candidate, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would matter equally in the state counts and national count.

      1. In this constitutional republic that is also a federal union of States, we balance the wants, of the State governments and the people as a whole. This has always meant that State law governs to a significant degree the selection of the President of the United States. The Democratic Party is trying to make our republic less of a federation and more of a unitary national social democracy, which goes against what the United States represent. The people should be grateful that the distribution of electors scales the same way that the distribution of seats in the House of Representatives of the United States do, as opposed to a system whereby every State government casts exactly two votes for President.

  6. You can’t get rid of the electoral college. Every state between California & New York should have a say in who our president is. Leave the constitution & Electoral College alone.

    1. The National Popular Vote bill is 73% of the way to guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the country, by changing state winner-take-all laws (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), without changing anything in the Constitution, using the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes.

      The bill retains the constitutionally mandated Electoral College and state control of elections, and uses the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes. It ensures that every voter is equal, every voter will matter, in every state, in every presidential election, and the candidate with the most votes wins, as in virtually every other election in the country.

      5,187,019 Californians live in rural areas.
      1,366,760 New Yorkers live in rural areas.

      Now, because of statewide winner-take-all laws for awarding electors, minority party voters in the states don’t matter.

      California and New York state together would not dominate the choice of President under National Popular Vote because there is an equally populous group of Republican states (with 58 million people) that gave Trump a similar percentage of their vote (60%) and a similar popular-vote margin (6 million).

      In 2016, New York state and California Democrats together cast 9.7% of the total national popular vote.

      California & New York state account for 16.7% of the voting-eligible population

      Alone, they could not determine the presidency.

      In total New York state and California cast 16% of the total national popular vote

      In total, Florida, Texas, and Pennsylvania cast 18% of the total national popular vote.
      Trump won those states.

      The vote margin in California and New York wouldn’t have put Clinton over the top in the popular vote total without the additional 60 million votes she received in other states.

      In 2004, among the four largest states, the two largest Republican states (Texas and Florida) generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Bush, while the two largest Democratic states generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Kerry.

      New York state and California together cast 15.7% of the national popular vote in 2012.
      About 62% Democratic in CA, and 64% in NY.

      New York and California have 15.6% of Electoral College votes. Now that proportion is all reliably Democratic.

      Under a popular-vote system CA and NY would have less weight than under the current system because their popular votes would be diluted among candidates.

      1. Only two states, Nebraska and Maine, do not follow the winner-takes-all rule. In those states, there could be a split of Electoral votes among candidates through the state’s system for proportional allocation of votes. … It awards one Electoral vote per Congressional district and two by the state-wide, “at-large” vote

        1. Maine (only since enacting a state law in 1969) and Nebraska (only since enacting a state law in 1992) are not proportional systems.

          When Nebraska in 2008 gave one electoral vote to the candidate who did not win the state, it was the first split electoral vote of any state in the past century.

          2016 was the first time one electoral vote in Maine was given to the candidate who did not win the state.

          In June 2019, 77 Maine state Representatives and 21 Maine state Senators supported the National Popular Vote bill.

          In a March 12-13, 2019 poll, Maine voters were asked how the President should be elected

          52% favored “a system where the candidate who gets the most popular votes in all 50 states is the winner.”

          31% favored “a system where electoral votes are given out by Congressional district” — Maine’s current method for awarding 2 of its 4 electoral votes

  7. That REPROBATE is a TREASONISTIC TRAITOR! . . . She has NO idea what the Electoral College is for. It is to PROTECT the SOVEREIGNTY of each state so that the LESSER populated states will NOT have THEIR rights trampled on by the more populated states. She does NOT represent the majority of voters in this country, and does NOT know the U.S. Constitution nor it’s RULE of law. Elizabeth Warren is NOT qualified to be POTUS by ANY stretch of the imagination. D O N’ T vote for this Socialist/Communist If you VALUE your country. Team Trump and his allies 2020 – KAGA (Keep America Great Again).

    1. With current statewide winner-take-all laws, a presidential candidate could lose despite winning 78%+ of the popular vote and 39 smaller states.

      With the current state-by-state winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), it could only take winning a bare plurality of popular votes in only the 11 most populous states, containing 56% of the population of the United States, for a candidate to win the Presidency with less than 22% of the nation’s votes!

      But the political reality is that the 11 largest states, with a majority of the U.S. population and electoral votes, rarely agree on any political candidate. In 2016, among the 11 largest states: 7 voted Republican(Texas, Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Georgia) and 4 voted Democratic (California, New York, Illinois, and New Jersey). The big states are just about as closely divided as the rest of the country. For example, among the four largest states, the two largest Republican states (Texas and Florida) generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Bush, while the two largest Democratic states generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Kerry.

      With National Popular Vote, it’s not the size of any given state, it’s the size of their “margin” that will matter. Under a national popular vote, the margin of your loss within a state matters as much as the size of your win.

      In 2004, among the 11 most populous states, in the seven non-battleground states, % of winning party, and margin of “wasted” popular votes, from among the total 122 Million votes cast nationally:
      * Texas (62% R), 1,691,267
      * New York (59% D), 1,192,436
      * Georgia (58% R), 544,634
      * North Carolina (56% R), 426,778
      * California (55% D), 1,023,560
      * Illinois (55% D), 513,342
      * New Jersey (53% D), 211,826

      To put these numbers in perspective,
      Oklahoma (7 electoral votes) generated a margin of 455,000 “wasted” votes for Bush in 2004 — larger than the margin generated by the 9th and 10th largest states, namely New Jersey and North Carolina (each with 15 electoral votes).
      Utah (5 electoral votes) generated a margin of 385,000 “wasted” votes for Bush in 2004.
      8 small western states, with less than a third of California’s population, provided Bush with a bigger margin (1,283,076) than California provided Kerry (1,235,659).

    2. Trump, October 12, 2017 in Sean Hannity interview
      “I would rather have a popular vote. “

      Trump, November 13, 2016, on “60 Minutes”
      “ I would rather see it, where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes, and somebody else gets 90 million votes, and you win. There’s a reason for doing this. Because it brings all the states into play.”

      In 2012, the night Romney lost, Trump tweeted.
      “The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. . . . The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.”

      In 1969, The U.S. House of Representatives voted for a national popular vote by a 338–70 margin.

      Presidential candidates who supported direct election of the President in the form of a constitutional amendment, before the National Popular Vote bill was introduced: George H.W. Bush (R-TX-1969), Bob Dole (R-KS-1969), Gerald Ford (R-MI-1969), Richard Nixon (R-CA-1969), Jimmy Carter (D-GA-1977), and Hillary Clinton (D-NY-2001).

      Past presidential candidates with a public record of support, before November 2016, for the National Popular Vote bill that would guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate with the most national popular votes: Bob Barr (Libertarian- GA), U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R–GA), Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), and Senator Fred Thompson (R–TN),

      Newt Gingrich summarized his support for the National Popular Vote bill by saying: “No one should become president of the United States without speaking to the needs and hopes of Americans in all 50 states. … America would be better served with a presidential election process that treated citizens across the country equally. The National Popular Vote bill accomplishes this in a manner consistent with the Constitution and with our fundamental democratic principles.”

      Eight former national chairs of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) have endorsed the bill

    3. With the National Popular Vote bill, when every popular vote counts and matters to the candidates equally, successful candidates will find a middle ground of policies appealing to the wide mainstream of America. Instead of playing mostly to local concerns in Pennsylvania and Florida, candidates finally would have to form broader platforms for broad national support. Elections wouldn’t be about winning a handful of battleground states.

      We would not be doing away with the Electoral College, U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives, state legislatures, etc. etc. etc.

      The 8 smallest states (i.e., those with three electoral votes) together received only one of the nation’s 952 general-election campaign events in the 2008, 2012, and 2016 elections.

      Fourteen of the 15 smallest states by population are ignored, like medium and big states where the statewide winner is predictable, because they’re not swing states. Small states are safe states. Only New Hampshire gets significant attention.

      Support for a national popular vote has been strong in every smallest state surveyed in polls among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group

      Among the 13 lowest population states, the National Popular Vote bill has passed in 9 state legislative chambers, and been enacted by 5 jurisdictions.

      Now political clout comes from being among the handful of battleground states. 70-80% of states and voters are ignored by presidential campaign polling, organizing, ad spending, and visits. Their states’ votes were conceded months before by the minority parties in the states, taken for granted by the dominant party in the states, and ignored by all parties in presidential campaigns.

      State winner-take-all laws negate any simplistic mathematical equations about the relative power of states based on their number of residents per electoral vote. Small state math means absolutely nothing to presidential campaign polling, organizing, ad spending, and visits, or to presidents once in office.

      In the 25 smallest states in 2008, the Democratic and Republican popular vote was almost tied (9.9 million versus 9.8 million), as was the electoral vote (57 versus 58).

      In 2012, 24 of the nation’s 27 smallest states received no attention at all from presidential campaigns after the conventions. They were ignored despite their supposed numerical advantage in the Electoral College. In fact, the 8.6 million eligible voters in Ohio received more campaign ads and campaign visits from the major party campaigns than the 42 million eligible voters in those 27 smallest states combined.

      The 12 smallest states are totally ignored in presidential elections. These states are not ignored because they are small, but because they are not closely divided “battleground” states.

      Now with state-by-state winner-take-all laws (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), presidential elections ignore 12 of the 13 lowest population states (3-4 electoral votes), that are non-competitive in presidential elections. 6 regularly vote Republican (AK, ID, MT, WY, ND, and SD), and 6 regularly vote Democratic (RI, DE, HI, VT, ME, and DC) in presidential elections.

      Similarly, the 25 smallest states have been almost equally noncompetitive. They voted Republican or Democratic 12-13 in 2008 and 2012.

      Voters in states, of all sizes, that are reliably red or blue don’t matter. Candidates ignore those states and the issues they care about most.

  8. What we can all see is bad sportsmanship from the Democrats.
    Even little kids can see it.
    In blue states, like Oregon, the cities with smarter/more affluent people are beginning to switch to Republican, because Oregon has been blue for a long time and has the 47th or 48th worst high school graduation rate in the US.
    Even the county where the state capitol is located went for a Republican governor in the majority.
    The biggest county in Oregon is Multnomah in Portland and they have the most on welfare. BY FAR.
    It’s like Romney said – those on welfare are going to vote for Democrats.

    1. Trump, October 12, 2017 in Sean Hannity interview
      “I would rather have a popular vote. “

      Trump, November 13, 2016, on “60 Minutes”
      “ I would rather see it, where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes, and somebody else gets 90 million votes, and you win. There’s a reason for doing this. Because it brings all the states into play.”

      In 2012, the night Romney lost, Trump tweeted.
      “The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. . . . The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.”

      In 1969, The U.S. House of Representatives voted for a national popular vote by a 338–70 margin.

      Presidential candidates who supported direct election of the President in the form of a constitutional amendment, before the National Popular Vote bill was introduced: George H.W. Bush (R-TX-1969), Bob Dole (R-KS-1969), Gerald Ford (R-MI-1969), Richard Nixon (R-CA-1969), Jimmy Carter (D-GA-1977), and Hillary Clinton (D-NY-2001).

      Past presidential candidates with a public record of support, before November 2016, for the National Popular Vote bill that would guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate with the most national popular votes: Bob Barr (Libertarian- GA), U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R–GA), Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), and Senator Fred Thompson (R–TN)

      Newt Gingrich summarized his support for the National Popular Vote bill by saying: “No one should become president of the United States without speaking to the needs and hopes of Americans in all 50 states. … America would be better served with a presidential election process that treated citizens across the country equally. The National Popular Vote bill accomplishes this in a manner consistent with the Constitution and with our fundamental democratic principles.”

      Eight former national chairs of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) have endorsed the bill

      1. Tough. Lots of politicians change their minds!!!!!
        We can see that Billy Bob Clinton, Hillary and Obama all spoke against illegals. GROW UP!

  9. Can you imagine having this lying POS as our President– I can’t. She is as an habitual liar as schiff-sh**, the witch clinton,obama,susan rice, the ogre gnome nadler and piglosi. We would more years of nothing but lies like the 8 years with the muslim divider in chief.

  10. Elizabeth Warren is not only trying to destroy the State of MA, shes after your paychecks, and your livelyhoods, She has two faced us, and is outright lying about her scary outrageous plans for Americans. It’s much worse !! I Wish They All Would Leave The Damn Laws Alone !! They lived their lives as they saw fit, now they want to destroy everyone else’s lives,? and take all the American people’s money to destroy us all too ? Go figure !! LEAVE THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE ALONE, NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW !! …

    1. Trump, November 13, 2016, on “60 Minutes”
      “ I would rather see it, where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes, and somebody else gets 90 million votes, and you win. There’s a reason for doing this. Because it brings all the states into play.”

      In 2012, the night Romney lost, Trump tweeted.
      “The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. . . . The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.”

      In 1969, The U.S. House of Representatives voted for a national popular vote by a 338–70 margin.

      Presidential candidates who supported direct election of the President in the form of a constitutional amendment, before the National Popular Vote bill was introduced: George H.W. Bush (R-TX-1969), Bob Dole (R-KS-1969), Gerald Ford (R-MI-1969), Richard Nixon (R-CA-1969),

  11. And Susan Anthony, both the Clintons and Obama spoke about the illegals as though they were criminals and Bill Clinton flat out lied about having sex with Monica.

  12. The Electoral College was put in there for a good reason. Leave it alone.

    It’s ONLY an issue now because the Democrats stacked the deck, loaded the voter rolls with the dead, unqualified and illegals and STILL LOST. THAT IS WHY THE EC IS THERE!

    Quit whining, Liberals, you never said a word about it for a long time. Now that it has worked against your Long March into Communism you’re against it. Grow up and stop your childish tantrums, you can’t have your way all the time.

    1. Trump, November 13, 2016, on “60 Minutes”
      “ I would rather see it, where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes, and somebody else gets 90 million votes, and you win. There’s a reason for doing this. Because it brings all the states into play.”

      In 2012, the night Romney lost, Trump tweeted.
      “The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. . . . The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.”

      In 1969, The U.S. House of Representatives voted for a national popular vote by a 338–70 margin.

      Presidential candidates who supported direct election of the President in the form of a constitutional amendment, before the National Popular Vote bill was introduced: George H.W. Bush (R-TX-1969), Bob Dole (R-KS-1969), Gerald Ford (R-MI-1969), Richard Nixon (R-CA-1969), Jimmy Carter (D-GA-1977), and Hillary Clinton (D-NY-2001).

      Past presidential candidates with a public record of support, before November 2016, for the National Popular Vote bill that would guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate with the most national popular votes: Bob Barr (Libertarian- GA), U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R–GA), Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), and Senator Fred Thompson (R–TN), Senator and Vice President Al Gore (D-TN), Ralph Nader, Governor Martin O’Malley (D-MD), Jill Stein (Green), Senator Birch Bayh (D-IN), Senator and Governor Lincoln Chafee (R-I-D, -RI), Governor and former Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean (D–VT), Congressmen John Anderson (R, I –ILL).

      Newt Gingrich summarized his support for the National Popular Vote bill by saying: “No one should become president of the United States without speaking to the needs and hopes of Americans in all 50 states. … America would be better served with a presidential election process that treated citizens across the country equally. The National Popular Vote bill accomplishes this in a manner consistent with the Constitution and with our fundamental democratic principles.”

      Eight former national chairs of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) have endorsed the bill

      The National Popular Vote bill is 73% of the way to guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the country, by changing state winner-take-all laws (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), without changing anything in the Constitution, using the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes.

      1. So, Vasu, you have a new alias. Your middle initial wouldn’t be “B” would it?

        Leave the Constitution alone. Get your mitts off! It has worked since it was adopted and for all good reasons.

        Nobody except Democrat/Communists want it changed. EVERY member of Congress took an OATH to uphold it. Now that the Commiecrats lost an election they want to change it. Your tears are so-o-o touching.

    2. Share verifiable documented EVIDENCE that Democrats stacked the deck, loaded the voter rolls with the dead, unqualified and illegals. Successful prosecutions by Trump’s DOJ?

      1. Vasu! You want “proof”? Go to the basement of the Capitol Building. They’ll give you all the “proof” you want. Your posts are a JOKE, Comrade!!

        LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

  13. Do you want California and New York determining the President of the entire country?

    Eliminate the electoral college and that is what you are left with.

    Everyone cool with that?

    1. 5,187,019 Californians live in rural areas.
      1,366,760 New Yorkers live in rural areas.

      Now, because of statewide winner-take-all laws for awarding electors, minority party voters in the states don’t matter.

      California and New York state together would not dominate the choice of President under National Popular Vote because there is an equally populous group of Republican states (with 58 million people) that gave Trump a similar percentage of their vote (60%) and a similar popular-vote margin (6 million).

      In 2016, New York state and California Democrats together cast 9.7% of the total national popular vote.

      California & New York state account for 16.7% of the voting-eligible population

      Alone, they could not determine the presidency.

      In total New York state and California cast 16% of the total national popular vote

      In total, Florida, Texas, and Pennsylvania cast 18% of the total national popular vote.
      Trump won those states.

      The vote margin in California and New York wouldn’t have put Clinton over the top in the popular vote total without the additional 60 million votes she received in other states.

      In 2004, among the four largest states, the two largest Republican states (Texas and Florida) generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Bush, while the two largest Democratic states generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Kerry.

      New York state and California together cast 15.7% of the national popular vote in 2012.
      About 62% Democratic in CA, and 64% in NY.

      New York and California have 15.6% of Electoral College votes. Now that proportion is all reliably Democratic.

      Under a popular-vote system CA and NY would have less weight than under the current system because their popular votes would be diluted among candidates.

  14. if your company does not any sharing with Facebook or Twitter I am going to have to part with you because I share my news with everyone that I know and I’m not about to continue to copy and paste your information in to Facebook when all I should have to do is click on a Facebook link on your page

  15. Warren is so desperate. Every time she walks in a room I think of a chicken flapping it’s wings.
    She’s not Presidential, and promises us everything that she can’t produce.

  16. This is very interesting, You’re a very skilled blogger. I have joined your rss feed and look forward to seeking more of your great post. Also, I’ve shared your site in my social networks!

  17. According to my study, after a foreclosed home is available at an auction, it is common to the borrower to still have any remaining balance on the loan. There are many lenders who try and have all costs and liens paid off by the upcoming buyer. Nonetheless, depending on selected programs, polices, and state guidelines there may be quite a few loans that aren’t easily solved through the shift of financial products. Therefore, the duty still rests on the client that has had his or her property in foreclosure. Thanks for sharing your opinions on this website.

  18. Pretty section of content. I just stumbled upon your weblog and in accession capital to assert that I get actually enjoyed account your blog posts. Anyway I will be subscribing to your feeds and even I achievement you access consistently rapidly.

  19. While some lawmakers — including some Republicans — have argued against the President’s use of national emergency powers in this instance, the Justice Department set forth a robust defense of the President’s authority to do so in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell earlier this month, according to a copy obtained by CNN on Friday.

  20. Very nice info and straight to the point. I don’t know if this is truly the best place to ask but do you guys have any ideea where to employ some professional writers? Thanks 🙂

  21. Mrs. Fister, this drop is your next bit of information. Please message the agency at your convenience. No further information until next transmission. This is broadcast #3698. Do not delete.

  22. Pingback: Homepage
  23. 40933 4211hello!,I actually like your writing really a whole lot! percentage we maintain up a correspondence extra about your write-up on AOL? I want an expert on this region to unravel my difficulty. May possibly be that is you! Taking a appear forward to peer you. 609196

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Ad Blocker Detected!

Advertisements fund this website. Please disable your adblocking software or whitelist our website.
Thank You!