Originally Posted by woj

you bring up a good point about the fact that many people end up not voting in states that are way blue or way red... deciding winner by popular vote would solve that problem, but at the same time it would concentrate all the political power in a few major cities, leaving rural areas and smaller states practically powerless...

so it's debatable which way is better, but if it worked fine for few hundred years, why change it now? Isn't a good rule of thumb "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"? Isn't the main reason why there is drama is because Hillary won popular vote? what if election results were reversed, would you still think it's a good idea, or would you lean towards keeping what worked for few hundred years as is?



yea, you are right, I looked at it wrong, Ohio did indeed in a way decide the election...