How to disenfranchise voters

Connecticut’s legislature has passed a bill that would give the state’s Electoral College votes to the presidential candidate who wins the popular vote nationally.


I'm no constitutional scholar, but the Electors in the Electoral College who have the only vote for President/VP that actually counts. We cast our votes for a slate of Electors pledged to vote for a particular party's candidates. At one time it was state legislators who picked the slate of Electors but have been popularly elected since the mid-19th century.


The Connecticut rules would probably not pass Constitutional muster. As others here point out, it would in effect disenfranchise the voters if the state's popular choice did not coincide with the national overall popular vote winner. Besides the Electoral winner has also carried the popular vote except in 4 elections, in 1876, 1888, 2000, and 2016.


However let's hope it works out! Should the law be in effect in 2020 it's set up for a delicious, wonderful irony:


1. You just KNOW Connecticut will go for whichever lame Democrat runs that year.


2. When President Trump wins a 2nd term, it's very, very likely he'll also win the national popular vote total.


3. That means Connecticut Electors will be obligated to vote for their enemy, President Trump! Even though they hate him and their preferred candidate won the state!


Obviously the idiots in Connecticut haven't thought this through. Not at all.


Kurt Bresler Added May 13, 2018 - 6:12am
3. That means Connecticut Electors will be obligated to vote for their enemy, President Trump! Even though they hate him and their preferred candidate won the state!
Actually you haven't been around democrats enough lately,   They change the rules by the hour.  Like Hillary telling Trump not to challenge the results.  Democrats,  no rules, no law, no brain.
Dino Manalis Added May 13, 2018 - 7:41am
The electoral college is the best way to elect a president, because we want all states to influence the electoral outcome, not just New York and California.  The electoral college is based on the popular votes of all states.  Bill Clinton and Obama carried many states in the Midwest and South to win, Hillary did not, that's why Trump won fair and square, get over it, Trump is our president and the electoral college is here to stay.
Thomas Sutrina Added May 13, 2018 - 8:25am
Connecticut has THREE ELECTORAL VOTES which equal the sum of your one representative plus two senators.  I suspect the law will be challenged in the court and the judge will not allow the change to go into effect for 2020.
Riley Brown Added May 13, 2018 - 11:59am
You're right, the law almost completely disenfranchises their voters, but so do many other states like California where all of their votes are cast in favor of whoever wins the state.  That is just as disenfranchising to anyone who isn't a Democrat, since in the end their votes are automatically added to the Democratic side, every time.
Morgoth Added May 13, 2018 - 10:23pm
While I loathe Donald the Thud I made my peace with it.  Now everything is a push for the midterms.  Donald needs to finish his term, otherwise we will get Pence the Lord High Grand Inquisitor as president.  That's far worse.
Katharine Otto Added May 13, 2018 - 10:38pm
You say the Electoral College electors are chosen by the people?  I don't remember ever having voted for an electoral college candidate.
Tamara Wilhite Added May 15, 2018 - 11:19pm
I've heard arguments that the states deciding to alter electoral college votes to reflect the popular vote is unconstitutional in and of itself.
Flying Junior Added May 17, 2018 - 3:17pm
Is it not all fifty states who give every one of their electoral votes to the winner of the state general elections?  That's not just California.  You're talking about ending the electoral college entirely.
I do have some sympathy for California republicans because of the misguided (IMO) open primaries.  I do not care for the top two vote-getters in a primary election to gain a spot on the runoff ballot.  I don't care for non-democrats deciding the nominee for my party.  This law truly does marginalize the California republican party.  There are other states that have this system as well.  In Mississippi the democratic party is marginalized in a similar way.
As far as the presidential election in California, 2016, you were in a decided minority, with Californians voting better than two out of three against Trump.  According to the final tally published by the Secretary of State, Trump won 32 percent of the vote in 2016 or 4.4 million votes, compared with 62 percent or 8.7 million received by Clinton.