[jhayward]

> If they didn't, they would have demanded that their leaders change this system

This is an assertion, not a fact. There are plenty of ways in which systems which are not popular persist long after a majority, not to mention an overwhelming majority, support them. In fact one of the major intents and effects of propaganda, which is being used extensively today in the US, is to raise the level of apathy in a population.

[magduf]

Propaganda is used to change peoples' opinions. Peoples' opinions are their opinions, regardless of how they were formed, and their opinions help determine their behavior, particularly at the voting booth. You seem to be attempting to claim there's some huge amount of support for changing the election system, but this is an assertion without any supporting evidence. As I've pointed out, there's no popular support for any such change, none at all.

Meanwhile, I can point to lots of popular support for other things, despite any "propaganda". Propaganda and apathy don't seem to have stopped various activists from pushing for marijuana reform, gay rights/marriage, gun law changes (in different directions), etc. Can you point me to ANY significant activist activity to change the voting laws? Any? Any at all? Can you point to any national-level candidate (or even state-level) who's made any noise about this issue?

(And before you try to claim that "propaganda" limits the choices and viability of candidates, I'll disprove that with one name: "Trump".)

[jhayward]

> Propaganda is used to change peoples' opinions

No, this is misinformation. The purpose of propaganda and disinformation is to reduce a population's ability to discern the truth. To wear down cognitive abilities until people stop trying. You can't use apathy or lack of initiative as a "fact" supporting your pet conclusion.

As for your assertion that there is "no", "none at all" support for any such change it just happens that it's a well studied question.

You should acquaint yourself with the facts that studies have obtained. For instance, Gallup[1] tracks opinion in surveys.

In the recent past as much as 62% of the population supported a constitutional amendment eliminating the Electoral College. After the more recent election year, 2016, it is closer - 47% vs 49%, still in favor of change.

In short, your argument is just baseless noise - just like a lot of what's being emitted by disinformationists in our current environment.

[1] http://news.gallup.com/poll/198917/americans-support-elector...

[magduf]

I invite you to show me evidence of any marches on Washington where people demanded a new electoral system.

[perl4ever]

Well, assuming there haven't been any, that doesn't imply people want someone other than the popular vote winner to be elected.

There is a simple way to ensure that the popular vote winner becomes President, so one explanation for why there are no marches advocating "a new electoral system" is that the enlightened realize there is no need to change the Constitution.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Intersta...

[magduf]

Sure there is. Your compact, which still isn't even in effect despite being around for over a decade, doesn't fix the problem with Duverger's Law and the two-party duopoly.