Voices should be heard even if they aren’t able to scream the loudest.

Liberals claim to believe in “equality” and standing up for the “little guy” in the face of bullies, but a movement gaining steam in blue states is putting that in doubt. Frustrated that they didn’t win in 2016, the left has a new plan: Sidestep the Constitution and effectively get rid of the Electoral College.

Colorado is the latest state to jump on board. Last week, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis announced that he would sign a bill which basically re-writes the electoral process, and could pave the way to letting big cities dominate every future presidential election.

The liberal called the Electoral College an “undemocratic relic,” apparently believing that he knows better than the Founding Fathers. “I’ve long supported electing the president by who gets the most votes,” Polis declared on Feb. 24, according to The Hill.

That plan would force Colorado’s electors — the people who actually cast the official votes for president — to side with whichever candidate wins the national popular vote, no matter what. By changing the regulations at the state level but still using puppet electors, liberals would avoid amending the Constitution to get their way.

TRENDING: Watch: GOP Candidate Klacik Gets Kicked Off of 'The View' for Calling Out Behar's Blackface Scandal

“It’s a way to move towards direct election of the president,” Polis said.

At first glance, it’s no big deal. Democracy means that people vote and the person with the most votes wins, right?

The problem, of course, is that America was founded as a republic for reason — and it’s quickly evident just how dangerous it could be to bypass the Electoral College.

Would abandoning the electoral college be a mistake? Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use You're logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out. 99% (6890 Votes) 1% (74 Votes)

The United States is a huge and diverse country. The whims and demands of voters in Manhattan are drastically different from the concerns of rural farmers in Iowa — yet the voices of those smaller locations are just as important, especially when you realize that huge percentages of our food and supplies come from the heartland.

The entire purpose of having state and local governments is that a far-off central government can’t bully the rest of the country, but that’s exactly what would happen if the Electoral College were abandoned.

A presidential candidate would only need to win a handful of big cities such as New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles, completely ignoring the concerns of the interior of the vast nation. The voices of millions of Americans who live outside of coastal population centers would be ignored.

Ironically, the plan could also mean that the votes of Colorado’s own citizens don’t really count, because they would be negated if they don’t match the whims of the popular vote. As one Colorado county commissioner rightly pointed out, “we do not support the National Popular Vote, which allows California and New York to decide Colorado’s votes for President.”

But the Rocky Mountain State isn’t alone. An eye-opening number of other states are joining the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, all moving toward similar legislation.

RELATED: Sciascia: Time To Crush Collins - And Other GOP Supreme Court Defectors

“The states making up the compact, which already includes New York, Illinois and all the New England states except for New Hampshire, would commit to awarding their electoral votes to whomever wins the popular vote nationally, regardless of the results in the Electoral College,” The Hill explained.

That Interstate Compact is not likely to have enough support to make a difference in the 2020 election, but it could play a major role in subsequent votes unless conservatives stand up and stop it.

The United States of America was founded on the separation of power, not a no-holds-barred popularity contest.

“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch,” it’s been said.

Exactly right.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.