Comments by "SmallSpoonBrigade" (@SmallSpoonBrigade) on "#RisingQs: What If The Popular Vote Itself Had 30 Electoral Votes?" video.

  1. A large part of the problem with the electoral college is that it's a bad weighted average to use. When there were only 13 states that were relatively similar in population, the difference wasn't that large, but neither Trump nor W would have been elected if they used a better weighting method for the votes. Each state gets 1 vote per representative plus 1 vote for each Senator. The result is that there's an additional 100 votes that muck things up. Wyoming gets 3 votes which triples it's voting power in the race. California has 55 electoral votes. Rather than getting a tripling of it's representation via the electoral votes from Senate representation, they get somewhere around 1% increase. Most states get somewhere in the middle. The end result is that states that do a bad job of retaining their residents or are just physically smaller get rewarded for it. States that are physically larger and doing a better job of attracting new residents get punished for it. It's more or less the opposite of what it should be and just increases the dysfunction that goes on. Removing the extra votes from having Senators would significantly reduce the issues with people winning the electoral college without winning the popular vote. You'd still have the issue with nobody bothering to campaign in most states, but that list would likely be smaller.
    1