When's the Constitutional Amendment where we decided to become a Third World "Democracy"?
Oh yeah, IT DIDN'T HAPPEN!
Section III Article III their @$$.
Since all of California's votes went to President Gore in 2000, the result would have been the same: President Bush winning despite losing the popular vote and every California elector. However, in 2004, the margin of victory for Bush would have been much larger, as he would have won not only Ohio, but California as well. The net effect of this would be three fold:
1. The Repubicans could ignore California in the general election.
2. The Republicans would never have to worry about an electoral college defeat, while the Democrats still would have to.
3. California would lose most of its clout.
I would oppose this move, but out of principle; it would benefit my party.
No, it's perfectly legit. States can assign their electoral votes how they see fit. I believe a few states still permit an electoral district to award its vote to the winner of the majority of that district, even if the majority of the statewide vote goes the other way; there was some talk of Ross Perot picking up an electoral vote in Maine or Colorado, IIRC. It used to be quite common for states to divide their electoral vote, until they figured out that this divided their influence in presidential elections.