No, your not advocating what the founding fathers wanted when they designed the E*******l College. If they wanted what your talking about, they would have designed it that way. They designed it the way it is, so it would work exactly the way it worked in the 2016 e******n. This is what they foresaw happening, and was their solution for just such a problem.

The Democrats lost and they want to make sure it doesn’t happen again, that simple! Change the E*******l College, let i******s v**e, let sixteen year olds v**e, change the number of justices on the Supreme Court, wh**ever the democrats can do to tip the scales in their favor. They will stop at nothing.

Welcome to OPP, LOUIS. The founding fathers intent was to balance the differences between small states and large states, between rural a urban areas. The current method used by most states give all e*******l v**es to the winner of the statewide popular v**e. Currently, California gives all 55 e*******l v**es to the winner of the state, in the last e******n all 55 e*******l v**es went to Hillary Clinton. Under my suggestion, Hillary would have still received the majority of the e*******l v**es, but Donald Trump would have received 16 e*******l v**es. To be honest, Hillary would have received some e*******l v**es in states won by Donald Trump. In the analysis of the 2016 e******n, Donald Trump would still have won the Presidency, but by a smaller margin in the e*******l college. President Trump would have finished with 290 e*******l v**es, as opposed to his actual number of 306. In 2012, the results would have been dramatically different. In that e******n, Mitt Romney would have picked up 68 more v**es than his actual count of 206. In other words, Mitt would have ended up with 274 e*******l v**es meaning President Obama would have lost ree******n. Check out the site www.270towin.com, they give an excellent breakdown and analysis of various options for allocating e*******l v**es.

In a perfect world!
You have given us the textbook look at the situation.
Now give us the steps needed to bring us closer to the textbook answer.

I will say first the need is to look:
Nature & nurture.
When we take that into account it becomes an issue of those getting the best nurture do very much better.

Those missing out in getting the better nurturing seem to be left with a life with out much hope of ever escaping poverty.
Now in my eighty's I can see that over the years of the rich getting rich & the poor getting poorer.
The textbook way is not working.

Now I feel that you are a well educated intelligent person.
I have been on this site & have tried to find the right words to finding out how as a nation we can deal with this issue in a common sense way.

Please offer your views on this issue.
I personally have my life in control.
Having had a very nurturing up bring & along with by wife we have 7 children & 11 grandchildren plus 3 great grand kids. All getting great nurturing.

So I have first hand knowledge of what & how to do what is right.
Looking at the world around me I see many that don't get the level of nurturing needed.

You have turned on a light with in me to in my visits to this site to bring out the issue of nurturing.

So I am looking to you to bring a deeper look into the nurture verses nature issue.
I feel that this issue is very key to what is need to bringing a better under standing at least to the people on this site.

I think you would be the best person to start a topic on Nurture verses Nature.

Thank you for the great post.

I agree that the E*******l College was a stroke of genius. I am just advocating for standardizing the rules. Currently the states can determine how e*******l v**es are allocated. By this reasoning, the case could be made that the states that want to throw their e*******l v**es to the winner of the national popular v**e. This would be contrary to the desires of our founding fathers. I chose the option of the 2 e*******l v**es represented by the senators, goes to the winner of the statewide popular v**e. The e*******l v**es as represented by the members of the house of representatives, be given to whichever candidate wins each congressional district.

I agree that the E*******l College was a stroke of genius. I am just advocating for standardizing the rules. Currently the states can determine how e*******l v**es are allocated. By this reasoning, the case could be made that the states that want to throw their e*******l v**es to the winner of the national popular v**e. This would be contrary to the desires of our founding fathers. I chose the option of the 2 e*******l v**es represented by the senators, goes to the winner of the statewide popular v**e. The e*******l v**es as represented by the members of the house of representatives, be given to whichever candidate wins each congressional district.

Each state has a specified number of e*****rs. Two, as represented by the number of senators, and others as represented by their number for members of the house of representatives. In the case of Nebraska, there are five e*****rs (Nebraska has two senators and three congressmen). In the case of California, there are 55 e*****rs (two senators and 53 congressmen). By dividing the e*****rs by the winner of each congressional district it will give a better representation of the will of the people nationwide. While awarding the e*****rs represented by the senators according to the winner of the statewide popular v**e.