• CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 hours ago

    This only solves it if you also make the number of delegates for each state be proportional to its population size. California has 68 times the population of Wyoming but only 18 times the number of electoral votes.

    • Kethal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      What you’re describing has never resulted in the popular vote winner losing the electoral college. The popular vote winner has always lost because states allocate delegates as a winner-take-all system.

      • CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        14 hours ago

        I’m not sure what you mean. Of course it’s never happened because we’ve never done it that way.

        If you’re saying that if you go back and calculate previous elections, then it never would have made a difference, that doesn’t mean it could not happen. Growing up I learned that there was only one time in history that the popular vote didn’t match the EC, but now it’s become a constant threat. If it becomes a viable path then eventually it is bound to be exploited.

        What you are talking about simply isn’t functionally equivalent to just straight up popular vote, for the reason I described. Votes are not worth the same amount in different places.