Twelve years later, still seething over Al Gore's loss to GWB in 2000. The same Al Gore who lost in his own state of Tennessee.

"Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty" ~~ Ronald Reagan

Absolutely Not! Almost the very definition of mob rule.

Let me get this straight... he proposed an amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America...and did not offer an explanation?

Sorry... never ever trust a Dem.. they are wolves in sheep's clothing.

Crooked ballots in Chicago, New York, New Jersey and California.

More Ratshat from another demonRat.

What we have in place is just fine, do not need to amend the Constitution.

Here's a better idea.

Have the winner in each congressional district (435) be awarded that electoral vote.

No more winner-take-all like in California who ends up allotting about 19 electoral votes to the Democrat, which essentially disenfranchises those voters since it clearly was NOT their intent.

The only winner-take-all would be allotting the Senate votes to the majority vote winner.

He doesn't have to offer an explanation - the intent is crystal clear.

Imagine a few hundred thousand 'extra' votes from 'deep blue' areas: Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, ... virtually any large metro city can easily stuff ballot boxes, and who would be the wiser, since they're all typically leftist voting blocks?

It makes stealing an election just that much easier for the leftists.

With amnesty for several million illegals given by the Dems, this would be a clear winner in their book !!!

No way, Electoral college makes sure that little States aka fly over country has a say in the Federal government. We are ready messed it up by changing Senate seat being appointed by State legislator to direct popular election. Our system of Government was designed to let the people control part of Government (House of Reps) and the States had a say in how Governmetn ran (senate)this was to make sure that Senators were beholding to the State and not a Party.

Why 29 votes? Knowing Dhims like I do, there IS an ulterior motive. What I suspect is that someone somewhere someone has figured out that 29 votes would guarantee a win in a close electoral election. The 29 electoral vote is guaranteed to overcome one or more states in the electoral college.

"IF" I were going to make a recommendation, it would be to award "ONE" electoral vote to the popular vote winner eliminating any possibility of an electoral tie.

Leave it alone. The system works.

I have an idea for Dem rep. Israel. Since the dems will be out of power after the election for the rest of my life, I suggest we consider it. The added 29 electoral votes might come in handy.

If things don't work out after that, we can always change the rules back, like what they did when regulations were changed and changed back after Sen. Kennedy died.

The system, as it exists, as crafted by the founders, was intended to negate the power of the city-state and the inevitable political machine. Not just no, but f^*k no!!!

The purpose of the electoral system was to make sure politicians didn't buy the votes of big states by giving them special favors and ignoring the little states. If we got rid of the electoral system then states like Wyoming would get nothing at all while the bigger states would get all the bridges, military bases, highways, art centers, and other gifts.

Yesterday, on one of the Fox morning shows, a Dem operative made a statement to effect that Romney would 'probably' win the popular vote but 0bama would win the Electoral vote. Now this Is-un-real proposed "Amendment". Just like the National Popular Vote Initiative, another push to end the Electoral College system, institute nation-wide systemic voter fraud and destroy the last vestiges of State sovereignty.

#12 in case of tie it goes to the House to decide. let it alone

Stupid

Are these just extra votes or is someone going to cast them, then who picks them...

This sounds like a typical Dim SCAM!

Not just NO, but HELL TO THE NO!!

In related news, whichever football team has the most yards gained will be given 6 extra points. And whichever baseball team has the most hits will get 3 more runs. Just to make it fair!

Interesting actually. The popular vote has gone to the losing candidate has won the popular vote only four times. the first three times before the civil war and the last time in 2000.

It is actually quite hard to come up with a scenario where this would help the Dem. Because california, being an almost certain Dem pickup gives them 20% of the votes they need to win. That huge advantage would be very difficult to overcome and is one reason the electoral map always looks so much more difficult for the Republican than the Dem (the other two reasons are New York and Illinois, those three states alone guarantee the dems 104 electoral votes, 40% of what they need.) Even a 60/40 split in these states gives the republican a LOT of votes.

So it is FAR FAR FAR more likely a republican could win the popular vote and lose the election than the other way around.

But I too am vexed by that Odd number 29, the same number as Florida and New York get, and more than 46 of the rest of the states get. In reality is is simply a backdoor way to eliminate the electoral college since any race that was that close would be decided by only a small handfull of electoral votes.

It would also make the big cities the single most important voting block. I think we just found our answer.

On a whim I just did a quick search on the electoral college results for every Presidential election. In all of our modern history (since 1840 anyway) only one election was won by less than 29 electoral votes, Bush in 20000 who only won by 5. In every other election the winning candidate Always had an electoral marging far greater than 29. So this amendmant is completely useless, a half cracked attempt to address a non problem more than a decade after the non event.

Amazing, the left is truly delusional over that 2000 election.

Why only 29? Why not 33 ... or 47 ... or 983?

So......the Dems are gonna fix this too?

Good idea, but ONLY if we clean up the voter registration rolls to eliminate non-citizens, deceased people, people incapacitated in nursing homes, multiple registrtations by same individual, AND require voter ID.

The Dems can pull a 10% over-vote in Chicago, NY, LA, Detroit, Phila, DC, Boston and walk off with the election.

It is NOT a good idea. It represents the first step towards a total popular vote which makes the center of the country away from the high-population cities irrelevant which is just what the Democrats want.

Just the fact that the democrats are pushing for popular vote should cue people into how bad an idea this is. We have the electoral college for a reason. If you don't understand what that reason is, maybe you should educate yourself.

The dems best be careful what they wish for.....

Absolutely not. Endless campaigning along the Eastern Seaboard and the Left Coast; the rest of the country gets to watch. These people already bring us "the news" and shape the culture; what a mess they've made of it all.

Nothing wrong with changing the rules in the middle of the game. Otherwise, Monopoly would be long gone.

The framers of the US Constitution were infinitely smarter than this dufus.

Up yours, Steve Israel (D-NY).