Ohio is a state that might greatly benefit from dumping the winner take all electoral system and going proportional. It won’t matter how much cheating goes on in the cities because they’ll only get the electoral votes allocated.
I’m supporting it in Michigan and hope the people of Ohio will take a look at the idea.
Something has to be done and this sounds effective in combating the “Chicago way” of doing things...
It would be nice to add California, Illinois and New York to that list as well. But I don't think it would ever be possible.
That being said, proportional is a harder sell than congressional district voting (the method used in Maine and Nebraska) which accurately reflects constituencies versus mere numbers.
I think another decent method might be state regions. For example, Pennsylvania would have five regions of four electoral votes each: southeast (Philly area), northeast (Scranton), central (Harrisburg), southwest (Pittsburgh) and northwest (Erie). Four of the five would be competitive and probably generate a lot more electoral attention to Pennsylvania than the current method.
I read an interesting article here on FR about that. Author researched 2012 and found that if every state went "proportional", then BO still would have won, 270-268.
Problem (from the R standpoint) is that traditionally RED states, still have blue pockets that steal enough of the electorate.
I'd also worry about voter fraud. We'd go from a handful of precincts stealing a state, to one or two precincts having the capacity to steal entire elections. That can still happen now (1960, 2000), but it's a whole lot harder. So, for "proportionality" to work, there's a whole lot of cleanup that needs to happen in the voting process.
I still think that a "proportional" EC is still the best way for my vote to wield the most influence, though. So, I'm in favor of it. I'm just saying, "Be careful with what you wish for."