It's fine if you believe we should continue to use the Electoral College. But damn it, can we do away with the revisionist history argument in which the Electoral College is about protecting small states against large states?
That wasn't true in 1787 and it isn't true in 2018.
That wasn't true in 1787 and it isn't true in 2018.
At the time the Constitution was written, there weren't even small or large states in the sense as today. The states' populations were much more equally distributed than today.
What wasn't equal were the *enfranchised* populations of states.
What wasn't equal were the *enfranchised* populations of states.
It wasn't the small states that pushed for the Electoral College. It was the large Southern states which gave far fewer of their own citizens the vote.
They feared a popular vote would allow for the Northern states to unilaterally abolish slavery.
They feared a popular vote would allow for the Northern states to unilaterally abolish slavery.
Even today, the Electoral College doesn't protect small states from larger states!
Since when are Florida or Ohio small states?
When was the last time you saw a presidential candidate in Delaware or South Dakota?
Since when are Florida or Ohio small states?
When was the last time you saw a presidential candidate in Delaware or South Dakota?
Sure, we don't have to worry about a handful of voters in N.Y.C. or Los Angeles deciding the fate of the entire nation.
Instead we worry about a handful of voters in Columbus or Miami deciding the fate of the entire nation.
No one can seem to explain to me why that's better.
Instead we worry about a handful of voters in Columbus or Miami deciding the fate of the entire nation.
No one can seem to explain to me why that's better.
Of the 10 smallest states in America, exactly *one* of them — New Hampshire — is competitive in the Electoral College.
Of the 10 largest states, *five* of them — Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, and Pennsylvania — are competitive in the Electoral College.
Of the 10 largest states, *five* of them — Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, and Pennsylvania — are competitive in the Electoral College.
Sure, some small states make up a slightly bigger % of electoral votes than they would in a national popular vote.
But that's a pretty small effect. The 4% of the population in the smallest states control 8% of the electors. They can still easily be overruled by the majority.
But that's a pretty small effect. The 4% of the population in the smallest states control 8% of the electors. They can still easily be overruled by the majority.
The real power of the EC isn't in the small states. It's in the swing states.
Just 11 states make up nearly all presidential campaign stops, advertising, and have hosted 86% of party nominating conventions over the last 10 years.
Most of those are large states.
Just 11 states make up nearly all presidential campaign stops, advertising, and have hosted 86% of party nominating conventions over the last 10 years.
Most of those are large states.
So you want to keep the Electoral College, that's fine, but come up with a better reason than "it's to protect small states."
Because it isn't, it doesn't, and it never did.
Because it isn't, it doesn't, and it never did.
