Popular vote ramblings

[King Of Dirk]

There are a lot of people (generally on the "side" that lost the last presidential election in the 'States) who believe we should switch to a popular vote for national elections. This appears to be a product of the belief that at least two losing candidates would have been victors had we counted heads instead of electoral college numbers. They may be right.

But they may be wrong.

Much is made of the fact that HRC won California in 2016 by a little over four million votes. That's good, if you're an HRC supporter. What's even better, if you're an HRC supporter is that she got 100% of the electoral college votes in 2016. She won 61 to 39 in the raw vote, but got 100% of the votes that currently matter.

Little seems to be made of the fact that republican voters are completely disincentivized to vote in California under the current system. Why should they? The democrat will get all of the important votes anyway. But if each person's vote actually counted, would the margin be so great, or would the GOP be able to find another couple million people to get up and go vote?

To be fair and balanced, the same can be said for democrats; they'll win anyway, so the incentive to get up and vote isn't really there...maybe HRC would have gotten 10 million votes in CA instead of "only" 8 million. I don't know.

But if that's the case, aren't there an awful lot of red states where a lot of GOP voters also don't bother because it doesn't matter? Like KS, OK, MS, ND, SD, UT et cetera?

This isn't meant to be a defense or an indictment of the electoral college system. I get why it's there and why it was implemented. I just wonder if those who would cheer its demise might be careful what they ask for? Put another way: I'm interested to hear if you're a democrat (or at least a non-republican) and favor a popular vote. If that happens, and your horse gets walloped - what will you say then? Would you be able to accept the results of such an election? Conversely, if you're a republican, do you think your principles can compete on a national stage, or is your party's survival tied to the current system?


ETA: it may be that everyone would be more likely to participate in such a system. Win lose or draw, it may end up in better voter turnout. I'm not sure that's a bad thing.