Can States choose to distribute electoral votes according to the popular vote?

It seems to me if all 50 states did that did it would be a workaround in the meantime to replacing the electoral college

 

From what I have read...they can.

Seems to be some doubt about whether or not enough will. The total has to be 270. They are now at 189.

I hope they get to the 270 number, because the Electoral College is inherently unfair...and changing the Electoral College seems to be a lost cause.

 

I makes no sense for a state to do this. The only time it would change anything would be if they gave their electoral votes to the candidate who did not get the most popular vote in their state.

 

So what you desire is a Hunger Games situation where the urban elites get to have full control over the rural areas?

 

Works well for the elites, until the farmers revolt. Then the military has to go in and start killing the farmers...like in Africa. What a fabulous future Dems have in store for us.

Hillary showed exactly what Dems think of anyone who doesn’t toe the line...she completely ignored them. And that’s what self centered city dwellers will do.

 

So long as they change their constitution to reflect the change, then sure.

Yes, it could be a workaround, but consider the ramifications of a republican winning the popular vote, but losing the electoral college vote. They would be forced to cast their votes for a republican, and this would no doubt be in a very very blue state.

I would so ****ing love to see that happen. However, your question is a good one. Yes, they can, but it would have to be reflected in their state constitution.

Maybe the best way for them to do that would be to only put electoral college voters in who are going to vote democratic hell or high water. That wouldn't require a change to their state constitution.

 

The Constitution does grant the right of State Legislatures to choose their own method of selecting electors.

However, I think Constitutional questions could surface regarding a scheme that seeks to subvert a process enumerated in the Constitution.

 

Not only is the electoral college unfair, so is senate representation with states with less than 1 million residents having the same representation and votes as a state like California with 40 million residents.The tail wags the dog.

 

States can appoint electors in whatever manner they choose.

 

Without the senate and the system of state appointed electors, there would be no united states of america.

 

they can, it's really up to the states

 

agree, it would only help prevent flukes like Trump

 

Both Trump and George W Bush were elected by the electoral college not the democratic popular vote.

 

All presidents are chosen by electors appointed by the states (or under certain circumstances, by the congress). There is no such thing as a popular vote for the president.

 

It has nothing to do with flukes. In order for it to make a difference, they would change the electoral votes so that they no longer matched the will of the people in the state. Their vote will no longer count. at all. Is that really what the people in the state want to do?

 

The people of the state don't choose the president. The state legislature appoints electors, and these electors from all the states elect the president.

 

For those that don't understand the deal:

The National Popular Vote (NPV) plan guarantees election of the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The NPV plan is a state statute in the form of an interstate compact. It creates an agreement among states to award all of their electoral votes collectively to the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote. This agreement takes effect only once the participating states together hold a majority of electoral votes (270 of 53--guaranteeing that the winner of the national popular vote will win an Electoral College majority.

Passing NPV will guarantee election of the national popular vote winner once the compact has been joined by enough states to make it decisive for determining the outcome of future elections. Until that point, a state’s current rules apply.

State legislators have introduced NPV legislation in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. NPV legislation has now been enacted by 11 jurisdictions possessing 165 electoral votes, or 61% of the 270 electoral votes needed to activate the compact.

 

To answer your question, yes they can.

However it's not a work around because the Court would not allow it to alter the election.

It's a bit of a grey area.

The reason it's allowed is because the constitution, as usual, doesn't address it.

If the states used it as a way to get around the electoral college they would be sued and the Court would not allow it because it goes against the intent of the founders.

When it gets to that point where it does affect the outcome of an election you can expect that to happen.

And just to be put this in focus here, there was nothing more clearly debated, and notes taken of, than the fact that we should not elect a president by popular vote.

There are literally about 50 pages of notes from Madison on this one issue about the debate.

 

Those electors generally cast their votes according to the popular vote in the state. There are some states that do not require it.

However, if you go along with this scheme, your vote will always be the same as the popular vote in the country whether you like it or not.

 

I have an even better idea. States like California should be able to assign their overflow votes to states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina and Florida. That way Trump could have lost by only a half million in California, but they could give 300,000 votes each to those states.

 

But in the end, the electors appointed by the states need to ELECT the president.

 

Electors can cast their vote for whomever they choose. That's what it means to be an elector.

 

The parties elect electors and they usually run for the position and have a vote.

In a few states the party can simply choose who they want.

Only Maine and Nebraska pick their electors based on a national vote.

The state legislature is never involved in this process.

Did you know that Bill Clinton is an elector?

 

And that's dumb.

It discounts lower populated states and will never pass.

In fact, the reason we have the electoral college is that smaller states demanded it in order to ratify the constitution so it can't be changed without an amendment.

It was the deal they made to make us what we are today.

You guys are funny.

 

No. A state appoints it electors, not any private organization.

Ew.