[/QUOTE] LaSalle the numbers are based on population and change every 10 years with the census. So as a state's population grows or gets smaller the number of congressional AND electoral districts goes up or down. I remember when New York had the most votes and Texas had much fewer. Each state gets 2 for the senators and 1 per congressman. Every state but Nebraska groups their electors into a winner take all proposition. BTW if it were based on congressional districts Trump may have had a bigger margin of victory. Look at the blue states and notice most of the voting precincts were red not blue. So in fact the electoral college better reflects the will of the country than the raw vote.
She has her reasons and their legit. I share the same and so, in due time. The celebrations will be epic
I think either the house or senate (maybe both) votes to approve the EC vote in early January, so I would say Trump has it covered this year, but under certain circumstances it is theoretically possible.
If the electoral college in the states that are usually blue states decided to cast their vote for Hillary which is within their right to do. I'm positive this won't happen and like HWR said house and senate must approve we think, which they wouldn't, but if it did I bet you all would be calling for an end to the electoral college.
The people who make up the EC voters are loyal party people, both republican and democrat. They owe their lives to the party so voting as you said is more than unlikely. If it did happen it wouldn't be due to the problem of the college but of th eparty selecting the electors. In my case I may be mad at them but not the system.
