Rescind the electoral college?

I am fine with the electoral college. I find it weird how many people think their vote doesn't count just because their state's population predominantly votes one way or the other. Because of course your vote counts, it's just the majority of the people in your state feel differently so you aren't getting the outcome you want. What makes a state a swing state is where there is not a clear majority. That is all determined by popular vote, it's just that it's determined by the popular vote in each state rather than the popular vote nationally. So I don't think removing the electoral college will change the feelings of people who feel their vote doesn't count just because more people vote the opposite of them. That will happen nationally as well. But I also don't care if we remove the electoral college and go to popular national vote. I know my vote counts either way.

I think opening up this would be a can of worms.. it has worked.. not always the best.. and I don't think we should change. it does protect small states.

I voted not sure because I don't know enough about the Pro/Con arguments.

Isn't it only a couple times that someone lost the popular vote but not the EC vote (e.g. Bush/Gore)? 

See, I don't even know that. Like I said: need more research.

ETA: I agree that the targeted campaigning is really unfortunate; the founding fathers never would have anticipated these marathon campaigns.

It will take a constitutional amendment to rescind it. I can not imagine that happening in the current climate.
But I am all for rescinding it.

I don't understand changing it, either keep it or get rid of it.

Absolutely not.

I'm one who is realistic and I realize statistically my vote does not carry as much weight as if I lived in a swing state. Our state also has very few electoral votes. Sure it matters because it's the American thing to do, it took women a long time to have the right, in a close election it *slightly* matters more..... I'll still vote because of local elections. Even then, it will probably be all Republican. I have mixed feelings about the electoral college. I doubt it will ever change.

New Zealand did this in 1993 and I think it's a good way to go. It results in much more cooperation between parties because usually no-one has the numbers to govern alone. SaveSave

I don't understand the point of going proportional on electoral college votes. If you're going to do that, then why bother with the electoral college at all? It would be the same result as just going with the popular vote, wouldn't it?

Timely as my son just sent me this: The Trouble with the Electoral College

It would probably be easier than trying to get rid of the electoral college, which I read somewhere they have tried 700 times in the past 200 years to get rid of it.  Maybe if it went state by state there would be a chance of eventually all 48 remaining states getting on board...  

I am also curious if people who want to do away with the electoral college have any issues with how congressional seats are proportioned (since that is what electoral votes are based on). Would you prefer we did the Senate seats by overall popular vote instead of by state?

You cannot "abolish" the electoral college without a constitutional amendment. There is also no way to force individual states to change to a proportional method without an amendment.

Individual states where the voters tend to go one party at the state level but have recently been voting for the other side at the presidential level would probably be more likely to voluntarily choose to make their vote proportional. But any state that has trends to one party locally AND in the presidential race would have no reason to change.

Take Texas or California, for example, one solidly red and one solidly blue for the most part. Why would the Republican Texas legislature vote for something that would give part of their reliably Republican electoral votes to a Democrat? And why would the Democrats in California want to allow part of their votes to go to a Republican?

But a state like Virginia, with a pretty strong Republican-controlled state legislature, might choose to go with proportional voting since they have recently been trending to the Democrat side in presidential elections.

Then again, they might not want to lose their status as a swing state that might give them more access to federal attention during non-election years by both sides trying to court their electoral votes.

I am against abolishing the electoral college as I think there is still validity in balancing power between those in smaller, rural states and those in the larger, more urban states.

Some states have had proposals to create "mini-electoral colleges" within their own boundaries, where each congressional voting district determines where its electoral vote will go. (I believe I recall such a proposal in VA when I lived there, and IIRC other states were thinking about it, too). These districts are already ridiculously gerrymandered to favor the party in power at the time they are drawn, which has a disproportionate effect on representation in Congress. It would be even worse if that were to affect the presidential election as well.

So Florida has 35 electoral votes.  If it's 51/49 split then 18 votes go one way and 17 the other.  A MUCH better representation of the popular vote.  As I write this though, wouldn't that just be the same result as the popular vote and if we got rid of the electoral college we'd be cutting out a step to the same result without effecting the result?  Someone correct me if I'm wrong in my assumption.

If we keep the electoral college, FEDERAL LAW, not state law, should require that every electoral seat votes the way they are required to vote by the people of the state, whose vote they REPRESENT, with no option to change their vote according to their own personal preference.  That just makes NO sense whatsoever.  For a presidential election every state should be following federal laws regarding voting, whatever those federal laws end up being so that there is a continuity amongst all the states with every elector having the exact same restrictions and encumbrances and responsibilities as to how they vote. 

Ah, but then we wouldn't need actual people in those positions because we would know exactly the outcome without a vote.  So we'd have an electoral vote but not any electors. Complicated much?! 

This is exactly what I would do.SaveSave