Trotskylvania wrote:Novus America wrote:
The states were intended to chose the president, check your constitution again. It says the states determine how electors are to be apportioned. If the states want to do it by national popular vote they can, but they do not have to either.
Sure I disagree with the winner takes all system, but that is what our elected governments have chosen to keep.
The constitution allows us to run elections pretty much however we want, and this is how we have chosen to run them. Yes I would chose a different way. But you or me do not dictate how elections are to be run. We vote for people who chose how.
The states can choose the manner of choosing their electors. The apportionment of electors is controlled by Congress under the same mechanism that apportionment for the House occurs.
This was gloss for "we won't force you to let certain people vote". The delegates at the Constitutional Convention and in the ratification debate made it clear that this system was meant to be based on popular voting for electors, and with few exceptions, that's how the system was enacted.
And the states have chosen this system. Sure some people at the convention might have wanted it to be based on popular voting (source?) but they could have chosen to have it be a normal popular election. And did not.