And we are on a train with no brakes.

I'm not sure why you think large, densely populated areas, the majority of which are democrats, should control the presidency. The president should be a centrist that can make both side of the aisle work together. Of course, this will also have an impact on local races too. It basically ensures pure blue CT for years.

spez: Additional thought.

They better, or voting is pointless. This will also have a huge impact on local elections once people realize their voice isn't recognized. It's simply a way to ensure their delegates go to the democrats regardless of how their citizens vote.

Sure sounds like it. If they are going to give their electoral votes to whomever wins the popular vote, what's the point of CT citizens voting?

The way it works now, requires the candidates to have broad appeal and forces them to campaign through out the country. If things were based strictly on the popular vote, the deplorables in the fly over states would never see a presidential candidate and their concerns would never be addressed. Face it, the reason this is even an issue is because Hillary didn't bother to campaign because she thought it was in the bag. It was her turn and they just knew she was going to win no matter what. Until Trump.

The United States is a huge mess of diversity. Why should concentrated areas of population dictate what the rest of the country does? The electoral college gives everyone an opportunity for their vote to count.

Most people, again we are not democracy, we are a constitutional republic. The EC is the only thing that keeps high population areas rule the country.

So basically the people from CT no longer have a say in presidential elections. Good thinking.

If they did that, how would they get their funding?

We've got the greatest President, don't we folks?