The latest movement is aimed at gutting the Electoral College and chooinge presidents by national popular vote.
Author Dan McLaughlin states in National Review Online, the fundamental system of electing presidents by 50 simultaneous statewide elections (plus D.C.) rather than a raw national popular vote has long served America well. It isn’t going anywhere, and it shouldn’t.
The Electoral College requires presidential candidates to appeal to the voters of a sufficient number of large and smaller states, rather than just try to run up big margins in a handful of the biggest states, cities, or regions with large populations.
Electing a President without the support of a majority of states would be destabilizing.
States that vote for the National Popular Vote have given away their vote to the most populous state in the compact. The end result is we will all be ruled by New York and California.
THIS IS WHAT IT MIGHT LOOK LIKE
To better explain, McLaughlin uses a hypothetical example: R candidate wins 48 states by identical 54-46 margins, D wins CA, NY & DC by 75-25 margins, D wins national popular vote. Who should win?
I used this hypothetical example: R candidate wins 48 states by identical 54-46 margins, D wins CA, NY & DC by 75-25 margins, D wins national popular vote. Who should win? pic.twitter.com/832nMi9j88
— Dan McLaughlin (@baseballcrank) May 3, 2019
The Electoral College has one weakness, and that is the case of a tie.
28. All of that said, while the Electoral College resolves popular vote pluralities, we do face a realistic possibility in 2020 of facing the Electoral College’s real weakness: a tie decided by the House. Which would likely go to Trump, depending how the 2020 House races go. pic.twitter.com/Pjr3Rqbm7g
— Dan McLaughlin (@baseballcrank) May 4, 2019