Has popular vote compact support died out?

[madville]

Haven’t seen any support lately for the states to enact the popular vote compact where they give all their electoral votes to the national popular vote winner.

This last scenario would have had all the blue states being required to give their electoral college votes to Trump and made it a unanimous decision. Doesn’t sound like a good idea with the 2024 results.

[33taw]

1. I am guessing that it isn't high in the priority list right now.

[MichMan]

2. Along with abolishing the filibuster

[RJ-MacReady]

3. I am willing to admit it

I am for abolishing the filibuster if our side is in control likewise with the popular vote compact.

[PBC_Democrat]

4. I Have Always Opposed the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

Can you imagine the disruption and discontent when California or Oregon has to cast their electoral votes for the Republican candidate?

I think this appealed to Democrats when it was unthinkable that we would lose the popular vote. Not to mention, I believe it would be found unconstitutional by any version of the Supreme Court.

IMHO, the key to winning is running reasonable, centrist candidates with crossover appeal. Reps AOC and Crockett are great but they aren't getting any laws passed. Progress is incremental ...

I believe we need to listen to Steven A Smith and Bill Mahr and other smart people who see the reality of the situation and the country.

The bottom line is that almost 50% of the voters are right of center and the left has managed to project profoundly unpopular positions on fringe issues like trans women in girls sports, open immigration, defund the police, and forgiving student loan debt. I have heard and understand all of the arguments on each issue ... they don't resonate with the country at large.

If Democratic candidates don't win - they can't make changes, just headlines.

Final thought - Ranked Choice Voting is the key to electing candidates with broader appeal. It served us well in the the Alaska House election.

[karynnj]

6. Bill Maher is smart?? He is opinionated and he has a platform

I also think your list of positions includes some that were NEVER any candidate's position. Open borders? Defund the police? The Republicans made Trans women in sports and issue, not us.

As to Alaska, isn't it a jungle primary and ranked choice voting that accomplished what you want. Remember, RCV in the primary made Adams the Democratic candidate in NYC

[karynnj]

5. It would not kick in until states with enough electoral votes ageee

There would be no real impact in years, like 2024 or 2008, 2012, 2020 when the same party wins both. The years that would have been impacted were 2000 and 2016. Had Kerry won Ohio, that pact would have reelected Bush.

However, if that pact were in place, how elections were run would change greatly and I think in our favor. Imagine if the campaign spent more of its time in the large cities.

[MichMan]

7. "It would not kick in until states with enough electoral votes ageee"

Which appears that it's not based on a principled argument, but as an attempt to gain a political advantage. If states truly believed in it on the basis of principal, they would enact it now, without waiting to see what other states did.

If the desired goal is to ensure everyone's vote counts, states are perfectly free to allocate their Electoral College votes proportionally instead of winner takes all if they so desire. Very few have done so.

[karynnj]

9. I strongly disagree although I almost always agree with you

No state should do this until enough states are doing it to insure that the popular vote winner wins. The goal is to shift from the elector Congress to the winner of the popular vote.

Given the states currently signed up, if it kicked in immediately, the Republicans would win if they won either the electoral Congress or the popular vote. We would need to win both to win.

[W_HAMILTON]

10. Yeah, no.

I'm sure you would love to see blue states handicapped even further in presidential races, but, no, there is absolutely no reason for them to play by a different set of rules than the other states and they are not hypocrites for not doing so.

A handful of states doing this while others continue to play by the Electoral College rules that are still in place does not ensure "everyone's vote counts" -- quite the opposite, actually.

[W_HAMILTON]

8. Trump would have won regardless of what rule was in place in 2024, but he would have lost in 2016 if the popular vote...

...compact was in place, meaning there would never have been a Trump in the first place to hang around and win in 2024.

Democrats have still been the only ones hurt by the Electoral College setup in recent times, so I'm not sure what your side comment about 2024 has to do with anything.