This compact is a great idea, but unfortunately it doesn't interact well with other reforms like Ranked Choice Voting where voters can express their opinions on multiple candidates (if they chose to).
One solution would be to allow candidates who are eliminated at the national aggregation stage to specify who their votes should be reassigned to. That at least solves the problem of spoiler candidates, as long as the voter trusts their (third party) candidate to reassign their support correctly.
Another possible improvement would have been for the compact to elect not the popular vote winner, but the candidate who would have won if each state had assigned their electors in proportion to the popular vote within that state itself. This more incremental approach would avoid the objection that the electoral college "correctly" boosts the voting weight of people in smaller states.
1 comment
[ 5.0 ms ] story [ 11.1 ms ] threadOne solution would be to allow candidates who are eliminated at the national aggregation stage to specify who their votes should be reassigned to. That at least solves the problem of spoiler candidates, as long as the voter trusts their (third party) candidate to reassign their support correctly.
Another possible improvement would have been for the compact to elect not the popular vote winner, but the candidate who would have won if each state had assigned their electors in proportion to the popular vote within that state itself. This more incremental approach would avoid the objection that the electoral college "correctly" boosts the voting weight of people in smaller states.