https://legiscan.com/VA/text/HB177/id/2081705
Well, Delegate Levine has prefiled HB177 to include Virginia in the Interstate Compact to assign VA’s electoral votes by national popular vote. On the upside, we would never see a Presidential campaign ad again as our electoral votes would be chosen by a handful of large, Democrat dominated urban areas.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
” . . . as our electoral votes would be chosen by a handful of large, Democrat dominated urban areas.”
Exactly the opposite of the real impact of choosing the President by popular vote. Under the current system, the only votes hotly pursued are those in “swing states.” Under popular vote, every vote – no matter where – would carry equal weight. With the traditional dysfunctional Electoral College and as Virginia continues to move from purple to blue – no longer a swing state – the votes of those rural voters you are so worried about will become more and more irrelevant. A nationwide popular vote would change that for the better.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Baloney.
The Electoral College is in the Constitution for a purpose. Casting Virginia’s electors based on the vote in New York and California simply disenfranchises Virginians.
LikeLike
The Electoral College is in the Constitution for a purpose – to protect the country from placing an unsuitable person in our highest office. It has had exactly the opposite effect. Twice now. Time to make it moot.
As for “disenfranchising” Virginians if their votes are equally as important as the votes of New Yorkers, Californians or Texans that is a classic example of how words have to be twisted to serve “conservative” purposes.
Besides, you seem to prefer fantasy to reality. Virginia is rapidly becoming a reliably Democratic state in national elections and as such YOUR vote and the vote of that shrinking minority of rural Virginia voters will become largely irrelevant as are the votes of conservatives in Californian and liberals in Texas.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Or maybe not.
Northam has guaranteed near 100% turnout in the rural areas, so if turnout in the cities remains as it historically has been, Democrats have won their last statewide election.
LikeLike
They knew who was running and they could have turned out 100% this time. Who knows perhaps if the rural; folks actually do turn out at historically higher rates, the urban areas will as well. And what you are suggesting is the will of the minority will override the will of the majority. Keep driving those wedges, Don.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Tabor
“Or maybe not.”
Whistling past the graveyard?
For every new rural voter that Northam has created, Trump has created maybe ten new urban voters. In addition, Trump’s ruinous trade and agricultural policies are changing the thinking of many rural voters on matters far more important to them than Northam trying to curtail gun violence. Finally, believe it or not, not every rural voter shares your emotional involvement with guns. Your prediction sounds more like wishful thinking than political reality.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I often wonder what the Framers would think about their “Great Compromise” today.
I’ve been on both sides of the argument and have come to believe (all the tired old arguments aside) that it has outlived its usefulness.
While the GOP would fight any change tooth and nail, it will soon become moot as the demographics continue to shift…
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Under the current system, the only votes hotly pursued are those in ‘swing states.’ Under popular vote, every vote – no matter where – would carry equal weight.”
Nope. Under a national popular vote, high-density population areas would become “swing states” or “swing regions.” If swing states/regions are the problem you want to solve, then creating them by a different formula makes no sense.
LikeLike
@Roberts
Uh, nope. There would be no such thing as a “swing states” or “swing regions.” Every vote would be equal and it would be irrational for any candidate to ignore rural voters in the way that non-swing state voters are ignored now.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “it would be irrational for any candidate to ignore rural voters in the way that non-swing state voters are ignored now.”
That’s a nice fantasy, utterly dispelled by the fact that campaigning in high-density population areas would be more cost-effective than campaigning in low-density population areas.
LikeLike
Nice fantasy? Utterly dispelled? Uh, no. Reality trumps your a priori assumptions.
Most political campaigning is done through media and mailings. These costs are generally proportional to the number of people the effort reaches. On a per person basis costs of reaching out to urban and rural voters would be similar.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bloomberg could spend a Trillion dollars in Wyoming and still not get more than a handful of votes.
LikeLike
Bloomberg?
You are probably right, but what is your point? In a national election Bloomberg would have an opponent and those Wyoming voters could represent victory or defeat. Maybe he would try to win them over?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I, too, believe large parcels of vacant land should be weighed more heavily than the votes of living, breathing people.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I don’t but I do think that minorities should have some protection from the tyranny of the majority.
LikeLike
The Senate provides just that. And because of the current divides in electorates and states, it will be reliably Republican for the near future. But even if it does switch majorities, the margins will still be below cloture.
The Senate majority leader is one of the most powerful positions in government. More so than the speaker. And with a president of the same party he can effect legislation for years and judges for decades. So with a House that, with gerrymandering toned down, may favor densely populated areas, a Senate the heavily favors acreage over people, the president should be popularly elected by ALL the citizens.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You forgot your sarcasm emoji.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yep, the principle is well-established – One acre, one vote.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, when you consider the Electoral College with it’s 538 votes, representing the will of the people, puts the President in office, then the Congress with it’s 538 votes should also represent the will of the people when they remove him. So, no, impeachment no more denies the will of the people than does the Electoral College.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Country girl
LikeLike
If you want to show a picture of who produces our food this “country girl” is not it. Try a picture of a corporate board room with a group of sharply dressed middle-aged white men. That would be more accurate.
It seems that in the simplistic analysis represented by this “country girl” meme someone has forgotten to ask where do these good country folk who are kind enough to produce our food – but only if they can keep their guns – get ALMOST EVERYTHING they use and consume? Answer – city folk.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sure, those board members diligently grow our steaks right on those styrofoam dishes right there in the board room.
LikeLike
@Tabor
Steaks from styrofoam?
No, they hire illegal non-voting immigrants without guns to do the work on their sprawling corporate farms.
But, if it floats your boat to promote the obsolete stereotype of the family farm, knock yourself out.
By the way, where did “country girl” get that gun? Make it herself? Or did some city folk make it for her?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Liberals will try anything to steal elections. Since the only states to agree so far are very liberal so no one takes issue because they are mostly reliably Democrat but in other states like Va, I think it will be hotly contested in court as disenfranchising the people of the state. Even though the constitution gives wide latitude on how electors are to vote, it is a solid argument.
LikeLike
Yeah. The GOP hasn’t gerrymandered their way to election victories in places like Wisconsin and North Carolina. Or closed down polling places in low income areas with historically Democratic voters like in Georgia and Kansas. Talk about disenfranchising voters.
And over the past several elections, VA has gone blue statewide. Governor, Senators and POTUS. Saying that VA is even close to red is ignoring the facts.
LikeLike
“Stealing elections” happens when a corrupt Supreme Court violates a state’s right to follow its own laws and courts in choosing its electors. That is exactly what happened in 2000. The result was the most disastrous administration of the modern era up to then. Trust the people.
Look at the current train wreck of a Presidency. It is NOT one the people chose. Trust the people.
LikeLiked by 1 person
California alone accounted for the difference in popular vote. To allow California to choose the president ignores the entire rest of the nation and the purpose of the EC. People much smarter than you figured that one out 250 years ago. And although it is obvious you have this unhealthy deep seated hatred in your soul, in our system of elections, Bush was and Trump is the choice of the people whether you like it or not. If Democrats keep up the whiney baby tantrums and endless pursuit of impeachment, expect another 4 years of Trump and loss of the House.
LikeLike
Whiney?
It is people like you who come out to whine when a proposal is made to base the choosing of the President on what We, the People want. And there is absolutely no valid or defensible reason why our only two elected national offices should be chosen by a minority of the people.
Your sort is running scared because the kinds of people that they clearly disdain are growing in numbers and resolve while old white men are dying out and/or becoming irrelevant. If you actually love this country there is no reason to support Mr. Trump. If he is removed for his proven crimes a far more authentic conservative figure will become the President. No, it is not about reason. It is about YOUR emotions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Really funny coming from an old white man?? Your killing me Paul. Please stop with the melodramatic posturing.
LikeLike