(November 18, 2016 at 9:31 pm)Jehanne Wrote: It's incredible!!!  Over 500K signatures so far!

I wonder how many it will get from people who didn't vote for Hillary because they thought she would win and they could comfortably "protest" her candidacy.

I wouldn't mind seeing the electoral college go, but amending the Constitution would require a fair amount of support from people and states who feel that it's the only way their voices can be heard. I don't think many of them are being heard anyway, but they don't feel that way. I also think that getting rid of the EC would not result in a country where the candidates try to reach everyone. We'd wind up with a new type of 'swing state' that would be seen as the most efficient path to a victory, and those would get all of the attention.

And then we'd be asked to sign petitions to restore the electoral college. :p

(November 20, 2016 at 12:49 pm)mh.brewer Wrote: Keep the EC, get rid of "winner takes all" in the states. Easier than changing the constitution. 

Wouldn't Clinton have won but for "winner takes all"?

Even with the clusterfuck that is the EC, Clinton would have won if the republican states had been told not to use the extremely dubious and deliberately inaccurate scrub lists provided by crosscheck.

It amazes me that the US holds foreign elections to a far higher standard than it holds its own.

(November 21, 2016 at 11:00 pm)Tonus Wrote:

(November 18, 2016 at 9:31 pm)Jehanne Wrote: It's incredible!!!  Over 500K signatures so far!

I wonder how many it will get from people who didn't vote for Hillary because they thought she would win and they could comfortably "protest" her candidacy.

I wouldn't mind seeing the electoral college go, but amending the Constitution would require a fair amount of support from people and states who feel that it's the only way their voices can be heard.  I don't think many of them are being heard anyway, but they don't feel that way.  I also think that getting rid of the EC would not result in a country where the candidates try to reach everyone.  We'd wind up with a new type of 'swing state' that would be seen as the most efficient path to a victory, and those would get all of the attention.

And then we'd be asked to sign petitions to restore the electoral college. :p

When a Republican loses the electoral vote but wins the popular vote, it will likely happen then.  Remember the "Democrats for Democracy" plot that Bush and Cheney came up with to to convince Democratic electors to switch their votes in the event that Bush lost the electoral college but won the popular vote, even though the exact opposite happened.

Corporate sponsored terrorism. 

(November 22, 2016 at 8:33 am)Jehanne Wrote: When a Republican loses the electoral vote but wins the popular vote, it will likely happen then.

This is where the importance of convincing the 18-29 demographic to get out and vote can be seen. They are reliably liberal but difficult to motivate in large numbers and as they get older they will skew more towards the center and the right. Find a way to get them to the polls every election cycle and the EC would become moot.

And since the elections always include many local and state offices, they could be making a very big impact at that level as well. Updated vote totals show that Hillary got 2-7 million fewer votes than Obama in 2008/12. How many of those votes would have swayed not only the electoral votes, but the balance in Congress? The governorship of some states? Other local offices, including district attorneys and judges? I think that many of the older voters in the USA have a keen appreciation for the importance of local and congressional politics that young voters do not share because they seem to think that the Presidency is the only office that matters.