The Electoral College is a phantom target. What its critics actually have in mind is the “winner-take-all” arrangement that governs the choice of electors in all but two small states—Maine and Nebraska.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
And if the Republicans would just stop with the gerrymandering, redistricting and voter suppression, the Dems might have a better chance of doing this. Oh, and they could stop with the fraud as well.
If it isn’t scrapped entirely I think the entire country should do what Maine and Nebraska do. I don’t want the National Popular Vote initiative however.
The problem is too many states are heavily gerrymandered. So badly so, that a candidate could easily carry a state, but not get a majority of the electoral votes for the state is electoral votes were awarded at the congressional district level.
But the current system disenfranchises millions of voters of voters in the presidential election. Republicans in Massachusetts or Democrats in Florida might as well not even bother voting for president.
Voters are just as disenfranchised in a heavily gerrymandered state. Consider North Carolina where recent state elections have been very close, yet the GOP has veto proof control of the state legislature and will have a 10-4 edge in US House seats in January.
Democrats should not stop supporting our main constituencies or denigrate them like the author. But we could add some: small business owners and small farm owners. These are working people with the added responsibility of business. Adopt policy to help them and get their votes.
Interesting take, and I generally agree. But that said, I’m not convinced the Dem Party actually puts much effort into reforming the electoral process in general. Probably because reforms would open a path for non-corporate parties to participate in electoral politics. Which is actually what we need
Comments