> For each individual state, the result is having a much smaller influence on the election overall So do it in small groups. You just have to convince a compar

> For each individual state, the result is having a much smaller influence on the election overall So do it in small groups. You just have to convince a comparable set of red and blue states, and it'll be easier to convince them that you'll both win some and lose some than to convince the red states to make themselves irrelevant. Such is the nature of compromise--find common ground, both sides win and lose a little. Of course, if you solely care about the fact some votes count less than others--which was the underlying argument against the EC--then just having your state allocate proportionally improves the lives of your fellow citizens now, and it's for the greater good. > Instead, there's a better solution in the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact[0] This is just a constitutional amendment with less steps and slightly lower threshold. It's not coincidence that blue states are in it and not red. The red states will not sign on to this because it would make them irrelevant. A blue state would not allocate their EC votes proportional to their state results because it would reduce the blue party's influence, even though it would be fairer to their citizens.