Since this article asserts that it is only necessary to achieve "deep fraud" in six cities to steal a national (presidential) election, I had a thought - since electoral votes are allocated to a state based on the number of representatives + the number of senators, why should a state not allocate electoral votes the same way? Each congressional district gets one electoral vote. Whichever candidate wins in that district gets that district's electoral vote. Senators are state-wide, so those are allocated based on the state-wide results.
Wouldn't this scheme ensure that a state otherwise inclined to one political viewpoint (e.g. conservative) except for one large city cannot be overridden by the voters in a single district (city) to force the entire state's electoral votes to go to the opposite political viewpoint?
Oops. Apologies. My first attempt to post.
Since this article asserts that it is only necessary to achieve "deep fraud" in six cities to steal a national (presidential) election, I had a thought - since electoral votes are allocated to a state based on the number of representatives + the number of senators, why should a state not allocate electoral votes the same way? Each congressional district gets one electoral vote. Whichever candidate wins in that district gets that district's electoral vote. Senators are state-wide, so those are allocated based on the state-wide results.
Wouldn't this scheme ensure that a state otherwise inclined to one political viewpoint (e.g. conservative) except for one large city cannot be overridden by the voters in a single district (city) to force the entire state's electoral votes to go to the opposite political viewpoint?