Trent England

A decent little recapitulation of the electoral college's purpose and history along with an apologia for it. There are better ones out there, but this is a quick read.

I do rather think that the "winner-takes-all" system of electoral college votes per state is NOT what the Founders intended. They intended something more akin to the way Maine and Nebraska still do it, and most states did this until the mid- to late-1800s: the popular vote winner in the state gets the two "senatorial" electoral college votes and the popular vote winner in each congressional district gets that district's electoral college vote. Look it up. That way is more "democratic," but retains the add-on effect and small state plus that the Founder's intended. It would mean Dems win some electoral votes in Texas and Repubs win some electoral college votes in California. And it would retain the defenses against a straight, nationwide popular vote where one party could run up voter totals in one region or in urban areas and swamp other regions or rural areas. But I digress. I wish the author had talked about this system in addition to his defense of the winner-takes-all electoral college and his prosecution of nationwide popular voting (and/or state compacts to that effect).… (altro)