Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

philosslayer

(3,076 posts)
12. Someone already did that analysis
Fri Dec 2, 2016, 10:51 AM
Dec 2016

And Hillary would have still lost by roughly the same margin.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

If that means that Hillary would win alot of California's electoral applegrove Dec 2016 #1
almost half of Iowa and Ohio's as well. Ken Burch Dec 2016 #2
This is much more likely to happen than abolishing EC. jackson Dec 2016 #3
The Compact will be found unconstitutional, unfortunately Grey Lemercier Dec 2016 #6
There are some constitutional scholars that agree with you, most do not etherealtruth Dec 2016 #20
I would lay wager that a RW SCOTUS (if it gets that far) will strike it down Grey Lemercier Dec 2016 #21
I am not an attorney, nor am I a constitutional scholar; however .... etherealtruth Dec 2016 #22
will read it, thanks Grey Lemercier Dec 2016 #23
How would that help? It would still give more electoral votes to low population states. n/t pnwmom Dec 2016 #4
I've seen this plan before, and one thing that I always wondered about was... TrollBuster9090 Dec 2016 #5
At the same time it would mean that rump would have captured a large percentage of libtodeath Dec 2016 #7
I did a rough calculation a week or so ago if the states EV were portioned csziggy Dec 2016 #8
That at least has a result that is fair and in proportion to what the popular vote was. libtodeath Dec 2016 #9
True - but I wonder if the method for determining electoral votes should be altered csziggy Dec 2016 #10
I think you can multiply the size of the EC Ken Burch Dec 2016 #14
Yeah, but then we'd get a chunk of TX, where radius777 Dec 2016 #19
It's a good idea, but getting there is almost impossible. DanTex Dec 2016 #11
Someone already did that analysis philosslayer Dec 2016 #12
The limit on the House of 435 needs to be separated from the EC. Persondem Dec 2016 #13
That would require a constitutional amendment. BzaDem Dec 2016 #16
It might. But the limit of 435 for the HoR was done by legislation, not a constitutional convention Persondem Dec 2016 #17
Oh yes, the size of the house is just a statute. BzaDem Dec 2016 #24
I read somewhere that Trump would have received 56% of the electoral votes if this were universal. BzaDem Dec 2016 #15
problem w/our entire system is blue votes don't matter radius777 Dec 2016 #18
Blue states would split there vote; Red states won't. briv1016 Dec 2016 #25
that is a very bad idea flyingfysh Dec 2016 #26
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Until we can abolish the ...»Reply #12