[EL] if national popular vote plan had passed, Hillary would be the winner

[Roberts, Brian E]

Only true if you think the candidates would have run the same sort of campaign if they had been in a national popular vote contest.  That assumption is untenable.

Brian Roberts
University of Texas

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Winger
Sent: Wednesday, November 9, 2016 7:17 AM
To: Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
Subject: [EL] if national popular vote plan had passed, Hillary would be the winner

With the greatest number of uncounted votes in California, Oregon, and Washington, by far, states that are very strong for Clinton, it is clear to me that she will have approximately 1,000,000 more popular votes than Donald Trump.


The Democratic Party has been the victim of the electoral college five times now:  1824, 1876, 1888, 2000, and 2016



Democrats should have been concentrating on passing the national popular vote plan instead of focusing on campaign finance reform.  Clinton's side spent far more money than Trump's side.  We should get over the idea that voters always vote for the candidate with the most spending.


Another reform Democrats should have been working for is instant runoff voting.  Yet just a few weeks ago Jerry Brown vetoed the California bill to expand instant runoff voting.

Richard Winger 415-922-9779 PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161109/bf1bc348/attachment.html>