My thoughts on what will happen when NPV goes into effect

national popular vote.

the idea is that a state becomes OBLIGATED to give all of its electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote—NOT to the candidate who wins the state.

For instance, in 2004 George W Bush won the national popular vote over John F Kerry who served in Vietnam. Under this scheme, the state of California, a state that voted OVERWHELMINGLY for the Haughty John Kerry who served in Vietnam, would have to give all 55 electoral votes to George W Bush.

Likewise, if Florida voted for Donald J Trump but Hitlery won the npv, then Florida would have to give its electoral votes to Hitlery.

Not a good plan at all.

The media likes to talk about "winning the popular vote" (except when a Republican does so), but Truman in 1948, Kennedy in 1960, Clinton in 1992 and 1996, Gore in 2000, and Hillary in 2016 all had less than 50% of the popular vote (even if we pretend there was no voter fraud). They may have had pluralities but the majority of the voters did not vote for them.

Very few Democrats have won an actual majority of the popular vote since Andrew Jackson: Tilden in 1876, FDR four times, LBJ in 1964, and Obama both times.

The dirty little secret is that the states, not the people, cast votes in the presidential election - which is not conducted on the first Tuesday in November but a later date, when the votes are counted by the House of Representatives and the winner announced.
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress
The Electors shall meet in their respective States and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same State with themselves Twelfth Amendment
Thus in principle, at least, a state legislature could simply elect the state’s slate of electors itself, without reference to any popular vote. So there’s that.
It seems to me that the state legislatures of purple states would serve their own interests best by not giving added influence to large populations in other states. Why would such a state’s constitutents prefer that?

N ever

P enis in

V agina

Which of course is a play on the meme "PIV is always rape, OK?"

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.