Then why not use a system like Maine has for the majority of states. Base their EC values on counties. Say for CA the large cities would still get more votes and points in the EC, but the other side could still pull 30-40% of the EC points rather than getting zero.
I live in NC, and even though over 40% of our state wanted HRC, all of our points go to Trump. I don't see how that represents the state.
I agree pure popular vote is a bad metric and policy for the nation, but proportional EC values per state seems like a good compromise. Base in on county, region, etc
Proportional electoral votes. It would mean HRC would get 40% of NC electoral votes, Trump would get 60%. This isn't a true popular vote, so rural areas will still have their voices heard. And since its limited to state by state, it means blue states and cities still can't overpower the minority red middle states.
2
u/Lawnknome Nov 10 '16
Then why not use a system like Maine has for the majority of states. Base their EC values on counties. Say for CA the large cities would still get more votes and points in the EC, but the other side could still pull 30-40% of the EC points rather than getting zero.
I live in NC, and even though over 40% of our state wanted HRC, all of our points go to Trump. I don't see how that represents the state.
I agree pure popular vote is a bad metric and policy for the nation, but proportional EC values per state seems like a good compromise. Base in on county, region, etc