dumb question? Why don't we have an election based on popular vote vs our current electoral system?

[LordSnailz]

Obama won solidly in electoral votes but when we look at the popular vote, he didn't win by much. The same can be said about the the electoral landslide of Reagan vs Mondale '84 but in the popular vote Reagan only got 59%.

Also, with our current system, it just seems like the swing states are the ones that matte and the dem. or rep. from red and blue states, respectively, votes don't count since it's a winner take all system?

Is there fundamental reasons why we don't move to a majority win type of system?

We've had several threads already on this. Try here for example LINK

Repost/Locked

Fern
AnandTech P&N Moderator

 

[jpeyton]

The electoral college gives slightly more weight to the votes of more rural states than major metropolitan centers.

For example, states like Montana get 1 EV per every ~320,000 residents; states like NY and CA get 1 EV per every 600,000-700,000 residents.

The founders were smart; they didn't want all the power to be concentrated on the coasts. They wanted the voices of middle America to be heard as well.