Has popular vote compact support died out?

[madville]

Haven’t seen any support lately for the states to enact the popular vote compact where they give all their electoral votes to the national popular vote winner.

This last scenario would have had all the blue states being required to give their electoral college votes to Trump and made it a unanimous decision. Doesn’t sound like a good idea with the 2024 results.

[33taw]

1. I am guessing that it isn't high in the priority list right now.

[MichMan]

2. Along with abolishing the filibuster

[RJ-MacReady]

3. I am willing to admit it

I am for abolishing the filibuster if our side is in control likewise with the popular vote compact.

[PBC_Democrat]

4. I Have Always Opposed the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

Can you imagine the disruption and discontent when California or Oregon has to cast their electoral votes for the Republican candidate?

I think this appealed to Democrats when it was unthinkable that we would lose the popular vote. Not to mention, I believe it would be found unconstitutional by any version of the Supreme Court.

IMHO, the key to winning is running reasonable, centrist candidates with crossover appeal. Reps AOC and Crockett are great but they aren't getting any laws passed. Progress is incremental ...

I believe we need to listen to Steven A Smith and Bill Mahr and other smart people who see the reality of the situation and the country.

The bottom line is that almost 50% of the voters are right of center and the left has managed to project profoundly unpopular positions on fringe issues like trans women in girls sports, open immigration, defund the police, and forgiving student loan debt. I have heard and understand all of the arguments on each issue ... they don't resonate with the country at large.

If Democratic candidates don't win - they can't make changes, just headlines.

Final thought - Ranked Choice Voting is the key to electing candidates with broader appeal. It served us well in the the Alaska House election.

[karynnj]

6. Bill Maher is smart?? He is opinionated and he has a platform

I also think your list of positions includes some that were NEVER any candidate's position. Open borders? Defund the police? The Republicans made Trans women in sports and issue, not us.

As to Alaska, isn't it a jungle primary and ranked choice voting that accomplished what you want. Remember, RCV in the primary made Adams the Democratic candidate in NYC

[PBC_Democrat]

11. These positions are not issues we win on ...

Kamala Harris praised ‘defund the police’ movement in June 2020 radio interview
https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/26/politics/kfile-kamala-harris-praised-defund-the-police-movement-in-june-2020

Several Democratic candidates support the elimination of criminal penalties for entering the country illegally
https://www.politico.com/2020-election/candidates-views-on-the-issues/immigration-reform/illegal-entry/

Murkowski, Peltola reelected in Alaska's ranked-choice voting, ABC News reports
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/murkowski-peltola-reelected-alaskas-ranked-choice-voting-abc/story?id=93854516

Democrats reject California bills banning transgender athletes
https://edsource.org/2025/democrats-reject-california-bills-banning-transgender-athletes/729482

[PBC_Democrat]

13. There are SOOOOO many real issues that we are on the right side of ...

And 45/47 is dead wrong on ... Mahr, Smith, Cuomo are calling him out.
Most of our positions are fantastic and enjoy widespread support ... our messaging and marketing -- not so much.

We have some ground to make up with our own folks before we start picking off the people in the middle who don't see much difference in the two parties. we need to open a line of communication to the millions of registered democrats that stayed home on election day.

Strongly worded letters and awkwardly read speeches on the house floor accomplish absolutely nothing.

We lost an election we should have won easily, we continue to lose ground in the polls -- all this heading into a 2026 Senate election that is going to be very challenging.

We can do better, our leaders MUST do better.

[karynnj]

5. It would not kick in until states with enough electoral votes ageee

There would be no real impact in years, like 2024 or 2008, 2012, 2020 when the same party wins both. The years that would have been impacted were 2000 and 2016. Had Kerry won Ohio, that pact would have reelected Bush.

However, if that pact were in place, how elections were run would change greatly and I think in our favor. Imagine if the campaign spent more of its time in the large cities.

[MichMan]

7. "It would not kick in until states with enough electoral votes ageee"

Which appears that it's not based on a principled argument, but as an attempt to gain a political advantage. If states truly believed in it on the basis of principal, they would enact it now, without waiting to see what other states did.

If the desired goal is to ensure everyone's vote counts, states are perfectly free to allocate their Electoral College votes proportionally instead of winner takes all if they so desire. Very few have done so.

[karynnj]

9. I strongly disagree although I almost always agree with you

No state should do this until enough states are doing it to insure that the popular vote winner wins. The goal is to shift from the elector Congress to the winner of the popular vote.

Given the states currently signed up, if it kicked in immediately, the Republicans would win if they won either the electoral Congress or the popular vote. We would need to win both to win.

[W_HAMILTON]

10. Yeah, no.

I'm sure you would love to see blue states handicapped even further in presidential races, but, no, there is absolutely no reason for them to play by a different set of rules than the other states and they are not hypocrites for not doing so.

A handful of states doing this while others continue to play by the Electoral College rules that are still in place does not ensure "everyone's vote counts" -- quite the opposite, actually.

[MichMan]

12. The Popular Vote Compact still has some states still playing by EC rules, doesn't it?

Right now, all states are playing by the same rules. The PVC would only apply to states that passed it. That's assuming it is found to be constitutional in the first place.

How would adopting it now handicap Blue states? Their EC votes are already all going to the Democratic candidate anyway. It would only come into play if they were forced to usurp the will of their voters and award their EC votes to a candidate that lost their state. Which is why it is a dumb idea.

Red states aren't going to vote for it, so it won't change their EC votes anyway, thus making it a moot point. What is does do is disenfranchise a state's voters based on what happened in the other 49 states.

[W_HAMILTON]

14. Each state is already allowed to decide how it wants to appoint its electors.

As long as the Electoral College system is in place, it doesn't matter what the minority of states in the popular vote compact do. Likewise, if the popular vote compact was in place, it wouldn't matter what the minority of states still using the Electoral College rules would do. The states holding a majority of electors to elect the president are the ones that will ultimately dictate who will be president.

And it would handicap blue states because they would be committed to a system that the majority is not committed to, meaning states that have not yet signed onto the popular vote compact essentially get two bites at the apple: one through the Electoral College and one through the popular vote.

And voters are already being disenfranchised much worse through the Electoral College system and it has already led to multiple instances just in the past seven elections or so where the candidate who received the most votes across the nation did not become the nation's president.

[MichMan]

16. Which is why I suggested states could on their own change how they apportion EC votes

Make it proportional to how the popular vote went in their state instead of winner take all. That way ALL the votes in a given state would reflect the will of their voters and be counted.

As it is now with winner take all, Michigan's EC votes all went for Trump, even though he won by a relatively narrow margin. If the EC votes in states were awarded proportionally, my vote for Harris would have counted. Any state could change that at any time right now as you noted

[W_HAMILTON]

8. Trump would have won regardless of what rule was in place in 2024, but he would have lost in 2016 if the popular vote...

...compact was in place, meaning there would never have been a Trump in the first place to hang around and win in 2024.

Democrats have still been the only ones hurt by the Electoral College setup in recent times, so I'm not sure what your side comment about 2024 has to do with anything.

[groundloop]

15. GQP states will never go along with this because Electoral College gives them a built-in advantage

The right wing will never in a million years agree to anything that has a chance of diluting their power. The electoral college gives them an automatic advantage, why would they ever agree to take that away?