gzt:JimsonWeed: Again... relying on the popular vote by itself is flawed logic. If it were just based on popular voting, all the candidates would need to do is focus on California, Florida, New York, and Texas.
Once again, your logic is flawed and based on an incorrect understanding of the electoral college.
Ah well.. let's agree to disagree. :)
In the meantime, consider the points discussed in this book. You can reference it at books.google.co.nz with the search criteria, "electoral college".
Bugh, G. (Ed.). (2016). Electoral College Reform: Challenges and Possibilities. Routledge.
I don't think we are at that stage yet! : ). Fact:
- Florida has approx 17% of the population of the USA
- Florida has approx 17% of the votes in the electoral college
Both true. You are continuing to claim that Donald Trump won because the electoral college was created so that states with large populations would have less influence. That claim is clearly not accurate on many levels.
Those are the facts.
Ok, for call. Im not really favouring popular vote or electoral boundaries, but, how do all the states stack up? I don't expect you to research that, but Florida is one state. Like here, some electorates favour one party. Say there was a National electorate, biggish, they could add in a Labour sector as that wont affect the result, but it may help the next guy in that other electorate. Popular vote does have its merits if it was illegal not to vote = peoples choice. The next step is how to manage regions.