People talk about abolishing the Electoral College system. If that happened, how many candidates would run in the general election for president? ~

@Tython Not necessarily. The votes of individuals in less populated states like Idaho and Wyoming wouldn't matter at all. The only individuals whose votes would matter more would be those in big states like California, Florida, and New York.

@RedBaron The votes in Wyoming and Idaho would still matter, the difference would be that your vote would be of equal value regardless of whether you cast it in Wyoming or California. That’s how it should be. Land doesn’t vote, people do.

@RedBaron that doesn't make any sense. Under a system of A popular vote, a single vote represent A a single vote no matter what state one lives in. The electoral college was established in a compromise to give the smaller states more power, that is what it was designed to do, to give a voter in smaller, then more rural, states more power for their vote. So that is how it was designed and how it works. Senators until relatively recently were not elected by popular vote, but now are.

@samueltyler2 But my point is that people in states like Idaho and Wyoming wouldn't get their interests and values represented. Candidates could campaign only in and appeal only to voters in bigger states.

@RedBaron they would still have the same number of representative "congresspeople" per population in the house as everyone else. Their congressional delegation will still be in DC to defend their interests. They happen to receive a more favorable return on their tax dollars than the larger population states as well.