different electoral college method.

[Burn baby, Burn]

here's one

at one time some states elected their electoral college members by the distirct.
That is, each congressional district elects one elector, dedicated to this or that candidate. like Maine or Nebraska today. here's the what if...

if all 50 states had tihs system, how would elections be different?

[Joe Republic]

Okay, well here's how the 2000 election would have been decided if the entire country used the Nebraska/Maine method:

Gore won 209 congressional districts; Bush won 226.  I guess you can blame gerrymandering for this, as logically Gore should have won more districts (as he won the popular vote).

Gore won 20 states, which equals 40 more electoral votes (one for each senator); Bush won 30, which equals 60 electoral votes.  This is where the rural/urban balance comes into play.  The Republicans usually score well in the big empty states in the West, which are given just as many senators as the big urban states like CA or NY.

Let's assume that DC's electoral votes were divided proportionally. Even so, Gore would still win all 3 electoral votes, or 2 if you discount that abstention.

That puts the final tally at Gore 252; Bush 286.  That means that the Nebraska/Maine method used on a national scale is even unfairer than the current system.  A big 'no' from me.