I have nothing snarky to say to you.
When it comes to the nominees, for a long
time, really until 1972, the popular vote,
the primaries, the caucuses, didn't matter
at all.
Then we began to get a popular involvement.
The super delegates make up only 15% of the
Democrats, 10% of the Republicans, and they
always go with the candidate of the popular
choice.
The question here is, what role does the party
have in choosing its own nominees and should
it be just up to people, some of whom have
no interest in a party, per se?
On the Electoral College, really the question
was, when we first started, how much of a
role would you give at all to small states
and sparsely populated areas?
The Electoral College does give them some
role.
And can you reach a resolution pretty quickly?
1960, the popular vote was divided by less
than one-tenth of 1%.
If you'd had a nationwide recount, it would
have been a national nightmare.
In 2000, when the popular vote didn't go the
way of the Electoral College, the dispute
at least was limited at least to only one
state and not fifty.
So, what's your opinion of how much the popular
vote should matter, whether it's choosing
a nominee or choosing a president?
Let us know in the comments section, and also
let us know what other topics you'd like AEI
scholars to cover.
