Originally Posted by
Ronaldo
National popular vote would very likely kill the two party system.
The coasts ruling argument doesn’t make sense. Candidates spend 85+% of their time in 10 states right now, and sometimes more than 90% of their money. How is this system preferable to a system where one vote in CA is worth what one vote in KS is worth?
We already have a system where 30% of the US population controls the majority of the senate. Therein is the check and balance.
I like that national vote and accept that political leanings may change all over the country, like they have many times. See the Eisenhower electoral map vs the Regan electoral map.
This election hinges on Michigan, PA, Wisconsin, and NC. I guess the thing that is disappointing is that so many states are in the bag. I wish my party could gain some serious footholds to make the other two actually pay attention to the voters instead of their own agenda.