re: Middle Ground regarding EC and Popular Vote

quote:

---

. All states become important for all candidates
2. Less populated/more conservative states still have the same safeguard against tyranny from the coasts since they're still allocated 2 EC votes not based on population (this is the actual safeguard, not winner-take-all)
3. The major parties would be more restrained and pulled to the center
4. Third parties could have an actual chance of growing

---

Exactly that. And I feel as if Trump supporters don't realize he would have won by a larger margin if it were proportional.

My biggest hang up with winner take all is the fact people that live in rural areas are disproportionately impacted by the popular vote in a state. Naturally, those in more populated areas have easier access to polling stations. With a proportional system (really how it originally started), the amount of people that reached the poll in each district would not impact the voice of that district. If a district goes blue/red/3rd party, at least they'll be represented and not have their will erased by the popular vote of the state.

It's as if people that support the current system don't realize it's really the popular vote controlling the minority within a state for the most part. It's illogical and needs to be addressed. The problem is consistently red/blue states don't want to give up that control.