Nov 15 2012: Hi Noah, thanks for your comment. I think one of the problems is that the people who can change the election system are impacted by the same decision. This indicates a conflict of interest. Changing the election system requires a non-partisan mind set. I am not sure we have the mindset at the moment.
Nov 13 2012: I just did some math: comparing the ratio by dividing the population per state by the number of electoral votes for fifty states:
- The lowest ratio is in Wyoming: 1:189,316: This means on average you need 189,316 people for one electoral vote (this does not consider the number of eligible voters, but I assume the proportion is the same in the states).
- The highest ratio is in California: 1:685,307: You need on average 685,307 people for one electoral vote.
This means, more than three times more people/votes are required in California for one electoral votes, compared to Wyoming. In other words, each vote in Wyoming is three times more effective. This does not sound fair, what do you think?
TEDCred score: +0.20 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A reply on Conversation: Should Americans eliminate the Electoral College and elect their presidents through simple majority vote?
A comment on Conversation: Should Americans eliminate the Electoral College and elect their presidents through simple majority vote?
- The lowest ratio is in Wyoming: 1:189,316: This means on average you need 189,316 people for one electoral vote (this does not consider the number of eligible voters, but I assume the proportion is the same in the states).
- The highest ratio is in California: 1:685,307: You need on average 685,307 people for one electoral vote.
This means, more than three times more people/votes are required in California for one electoral votes, compared to Wyoming. In other words, each vote in Wyoming is three times more effective. This does not sound fair, what do you think?