« Defense motions in Duke lacrosse case | Main | Stephen Colbert: Not that funny »

May 02, 2006


What about a large number of parties? I would prefer plurality rather than majority as a standard.

If they did away with the electoral college, candidates would no longer care about the needs of smaller, more ailing states or regions. They wouldn't campaign in small towns, or media markets. The name of the game would be to spend as much money as they could in large cities.

Living in a democratic republic, the POTUS needs to attempt to curry favor of as many of the united states as he can, and not just turn it into the shoddy way state politics work.

Most of the time, the person with the most votes does win.

Brendan quoted NPV as saying:
> The power of state legislatures to direct the choice of their
> states’ electors, the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled, is
> essentially unlimited.

Nonsense. The "one man, one vote" principle puts some pretty serious
limits on what legislatures can do. I wouldn't so quickly dismiss the
Court's willingness to consider whether giving non-residents equal
weight passes muster.

Given their wildly partisan meritless ruling in Bush v. Gore, it's
also not clear that the majority would resist making a decision here
on less than principled grounds.

I'm not saying that I think that they *would* strike it down, but
it's foolish to claim that "There is very little doubt about the
constitutional and legal feasibility of this plan."

The comments to this entry are closed.