The goal (national popular vote) is laudable, but I think that particular approach is flawed. A system where the votes are counted nationally and the ticket (p

The goal (national popular vote) is laudable, but I think that particular approach is flawed. A system where the votes are counted nationally and the ticket (president + vice president) winning the most votes is elected would be a system that I could strongly support. But a system where each state votes its electoral college votes in a ratio based on the state's popular vote, which did not change the other rules (like "if no one gets a majority then we ignore the voters entirely and hold a vote in the House of Representatives instead") would work poorly. The next-biggest weakness, I believe, would be that the ratio of voters in each state is fairly well known. There are roughly 200,000 voters per House Representative, so one must persuade a substantial portion of that number to "flip" any one vote. This means that, effectively, there would only be one vote "up for grabs" in each state (maybe 2 in the really big states), with the other votes essentially "fixed". This gives hugely disproportional power to the small states (imagine if each state had only a single vote). EDIT: Please disregard!!! I misread the original proposal, which is a LOT smarter than I thought. The proposal is to give the state's votes to the winner of the national popular vote, thus effecting the proposal I originally preferred.