(November 10, 2016 at 10:15 am)mh.brewer Wrote:(November 10, 2016 at 9:55 am)Crossless1 Wrote: I favor revising it so that each state's electoral votes are awarded to candidates in proportion to their share of the state's popular vote outcome.
In other words, get rid of the "winner takes all" electoral votes in that state. Tie it to the votes within the congressional districts. The districts get redrawn as the population shifts within them. It would then mirror the popular vote.
As I imagine it, the congressional districts would only be meaningful for selecting representatives to the House. For the presidential election, I would propose simply taking the total vote tally in each state and then apportioning the state's electoral votes to the candidates according to their performance. For example, if a state has 18 electoral votes and candidate A gets 60% of the popular vote, then -- rounding up -- that candidate would get 11 of the 18 electoral votes with the others being distributed accordingly to the other candidate(s).
Of course, whether one rounds up or down can be significant in terms of final electoral votes. It's not a perfect solution and there would need to be some mechanism in place that everyone agrees on to ensure there are no drawn-out pissing matches over the results. And I'm not clear on how that is supposed to work in, for instance, a state like North Dakota with hardly any electoral votes and wide margins in the popular vote.
But winner-take-all is asinine and any revision to it would be better than what we now have.
