forestwalker wrote:TW wrote:It has prevented a hand full of states from controlling the Office of the President, which could occur with a popular vote victory.
It does no such thing. What it does do is give a handful of swing voters in a handful of swing states disproportionate power in the process.
forestwalker, may I direct your attention to
http://www.archives.gov/federal-registe ... ml#history where you will find the following statement:
The founders of the nation devised the Electoral College system as part of their plan to share power between the States and the national government. Under the Federal system adopted in the U.S. Constitution, the nation-wide popular vote has no legal significance. As a result, it is possible that the electoral votes awarded on the basis of State elections could produce a different result than the nation-wide popular vote. Nevertheless, the individual citizen's vote is important to the outcome of each State election.
The Electoral College is one of the last viable visages of State Rights left. It was adopted by our country's founders to preserve the rights of those people that were not from heavily populated states.
forestwalker wrote:
If we're dealing in ridiculous hypothetical impossibilities, though, it should be pointed out that it's theoretically possible to win the electoral college with as little as 1% of the popular vote.
What I stated was a hypothetical improbability, not impossibility. What you have stated would come closer to that "impossibility." I'm going to crush some numbers and see if it could be done. As of now I doubt it, but I am open to proof otherwise.
Don't roll your eyes, they might get stuck like that. The fact is that most Americans believe that they live in a democracy.
TW