What would our campaigns look like if we just went over to a direct popular vote?

[hrmjustin]

As a NYer I think it would mean that I would see the candidates here I think.
Your thoughts my friends.

[jsmirman]

1. They would look very different, I'll tell you that

My vote would not be meaningless for the first time in over 20 years. That would be nice.

[get the red out]

3. Mine also

I'm tired of feeling like my vote is meaningless because I live in a hateful state.

[Curtland1015]

2. New York and California would be campaign central. Politicians would forget all about Ohio.

It would certainly be different.

[sharkman25]

7. You are correct. Smaller states basically wouldn't have a voice!

[slackmaster]

4. Candidates might actually pay attention to California

It would certainly be heartening to our Republican voters.

[doc03]

5. I wouldn't have to suffer through countless political

ads every time I turn on a radio, TV or surf the internet. The politicians would do all their campaigning on the coasts and Republicans would have to return to some degree of sanity or never win a presidential election again.

[bamacrat]

6. Dem's would actually come to Alabama.

Under the EC we are a lock for the pukes everything without trying. Hell I think a pub could come out as a homosexual, pro-choice, anti-gun agnostic who thinks the military should be drawn down and a national healthcare system is better than a for profit one, and still win. If it were popular vote alone we would get more dem love. There are a lot of bright blue spots in this sea of red.

[HopeHoops]

8. I think it would mean visits to all 50 states instead of just a handful.

The electoral college is so obsolete that it no longer has relevance. It's inconsistent (winner take all v. proportional), puts too much weight on specific states (PA, OH, FL, etc.) and reduces uncontested states to irrelevance. Popular vote is all that makes any sense in this time and technology-driven era.

I've heard the argument that it would give states like California a greater influence than say Rhode Island, but that's hogwash. If anything, it would allow the smaller states and those with close margins more say in the outcome. The same is true with primaries. For whatever party one is affiliated with, whoever gets the most votes for the seat gets the nomination - period. If Jill Stein wins the Green Party vote, she's on the presidential general election. There's no way we'll see serious competition to the 2-party system until we drop the electoral college.

[hrmjustin]

9. I think that it would be a more democratic way to do things.

[Nye Bevan]

10. I suspect that there would be much more cheating.

Lots of Republican votes would be "discovered" deep in the heart of RedStatesVille. One nice thing about the Electoral College is that it removes any incentive for such shenanigans.

[scheming daemons]

11. CA, NY, TX, FL, PA, OH, IL, MI would get *ALL* the attention

Major cities would get the attention, and candidates would ignore small towns completely.


To get the biggest bang for the buck, they'd spend all of their time in the top 25 population centers of the country.

[treestar]

12. Where the blue vote generally is

So Republicans would have to travel a lot more over the huge red map area.