Tara Ross, author of “The Indispensable Electoral College: How the Founders’ Plan Saves Our Country from Mob Rule & We Elect a President,” was inspired to tweet by Elizabeth Warren’s eagerness to do away with the Electoral College during her CNN town hall Monday night, but her thread is even more relevant Tuesday as Beto O’Rourke, who refuses to take a solid position on anything, mused that “there’s a lot of wisdom” in doing away with the Electoral College.

Asked about the idea of getting rid of the electoral college, Beto O’Rourke tells @GarrettHaake today: “I think there’s a lot of wisdom in that.” pic.twitter.com/k5yUiL2gmb — Kailani Koenig (@kailanikm) March 19, 2019

Plenty of people don’t seem to get the idea that there are a lot of Americans who don’t want elections decided by highly populated urban centers.

Throwing out the electoral college means Los Angeles, Seattle, Miami, NYC and Chicago will decide what's best for the entire Country ? You know the cities with highest homeless rate, crime, pollution, crime, illegal aliens and corruption. pic.twitter.com/Xv80KEM87S — Rosie memos (@almostjingo) March 19, 2019

Anyway, here’s Ross with an essential thread explaining why this is such a bad idea:

I’m not big on Tweetstorms, but I suppose if I am ever going to do one, now is the time. ?For those who don’t know me: I am the author of several books about #ElectoralCollege. Been studying it since 2001. Yesterday, E. Warren came out against the E.C., as you’ve prob. heard /1 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

She said: “My view is that every vote matters and the way we can make that happen is that we can have national voting and that means get rid of the electoral college — and every vote counts.” The audience broke out in applause. /2 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

Well, no wonder. Most have spent a lifetime hearing that the #ElectoralCollege is evil (slavery) & outdated (we have airplanes/Internet now!). None of it's true, but people have heard it so often that they simply don't know. Here is the truth: /3 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

The Founders created the #ElectoralCollege because they knew several things we have forgotten: (1) Simple democracies are dangerous. Bare or emotional majorities can tyrannize even large minority groups. Two wolves & a sheep voting on what’s for dinner is not a good system. /4 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

(2) They understood: Humans fallible. Power corrupts. Ambition, selfishness, greed are dangers. Some claim Founders were elitists who didn’t trust the people. NO. They didn’t trust ANYONE. Not the people, not elected officials, not states or feds. Checks & balances on EVERYONE /5 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

Carol Berkin states this wonderfully, noting that delegates to Const’l Convention were the most likely men to be elected to 1st Senate or as 1st President….. Yet they still sat and debated how to put checks and balances on those offices bc THEY DIDN’T TRUST THEMSELVES either. /6 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

#ElectoralCollege serves us well: It has several benefits that go unrecognized: 1st: It makes it harder to steal elections. Can’t steal election unless you steal votes in right state @ right time AND national election fairly close. /7 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

With a National Popular Vote system, obviously, any vote stolen anywhere affects national outcome. This is true even if the vote is easily stolen in a very safe blue or red state. This is a dangerous situation that the #ElectoralCollege protects us from today. /8 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

2nd, the #ElectoralCollege rewards coalition-building. Perhaps that sounds weird, after 2016? But NO ONE focused on coalition building that yr, not really. The result? A close election: One party lost. The other mostly avoided losing. But, yes, there was a coalition. & it won. /9 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

And half the country still can’t get over it. Hey, we admit it — sitting here on election night we were certain Hillary Clinton was going to take it in a landslide and we’d just have to suck it up and try again in four years. That’s how adults deal with disappointment — not by vomiting on the floor at the Javits Center.

Coalition that won in 2016 = group of voters who are tired of being ruled by DC elites. They don’t feel heard. They see DC insiders living by one set of rules while we live by another. They are tired of being told what to think. Tired of being called names simply bc disagree /10 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

Some of this coalition voted for Trump enthusiastically. Some held noses & voted. But the coalition all agreed he was most likely to upset status quo in D.C. So they voted for him. Right now, Dems are very focused on eliminating #ElectoralCollege that caused them to lose /11 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

Better off focusing on why they lost in first place. How can Dems reach out to those who have been feeling ignored? How can they find middle ground? How can they focus on things that bring us together instead of things that drive us apart? How can they regain voters’ trust? /12 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

How can they run campaign more like FDR? If Dems find that nominee, they will win in a landslide. Similarly, Rs don’t have to be stuck in world where barely win. They, too, should find middle ground. How can they build coalitions? Earn trust? Reward = Reagan-like landslide /13 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

I wish that everyone would quit going off into their partisan corners. Quit pointing fingers at the other side. Quit blaming #ElectoralCollege for your party’s own failures. What did your own party do wrong or right in 2016? /14 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

1st party to take hard look inward & fix its own flaws will start winning again. In landslides. We’ve been here before. Aftr Civil War, country was sharply divided bw North & South. Because of #ElectoralCollege, both political parties were forced to move past that division /15 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

Pretty much whether they wanted to or not! Dems in South simply couldn’t win w/o reaching a hand across the aisle. Rs could win in reliance on their safe areas, but just barely. Both sides had incentives to look at own mistakes, figure out how to build better coalitions. /16 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

By the 1930s, of course, Dems were winning in repeated landslides. The lesson? Remember that we live in a big, diverse country! Don’t force people into one-size-fits-all thinking. THAT is the lesson the #ElectoralCollege has taught over and over again, throughout our history. /17 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

Getting rid of the system now, when we are so angry and divided…. Well, it’s the worst possible solution. We’ll be stuck in this angry place forever. We are better off trying to remember why we have the #ElectoralCollege in first place. End of tweetstorm. /18 — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

Hillary wrote her book and did the book tour … that should have been enough, right? Blame everyone but yourself and then fade into obscurity with some dignity left.

Lady, you are the BOMB! — Nadia Business (@BusinessNadia) March 19, 2019

Excellent. — Cj Ramone (@theecjramone) March 19, 2019

Thank you. It is important to educate as many people as possible as quickly as possible. — mark winick (@markwinick) March 19, 2019

Thanks for this thread! If the electoral college was abolished would jaded Repubs in California, e.g. who haven't voted in years because they felt hopeless, suddenly come out to vote? Would the same be true for Dems in Texas? — Erin SC (@ErinsVB) March 19, 2019

They might at first. But they'd soon see that they are still being outvoted by big urban areas. Only difference? Instead of outvoting the rest of California NOW San Francisco and L.A. could team up with New York City & Chicago to outvote the rest of the country. — Tara Ross (@TaraRoss) March 19, 2019

That makes total sense. Thanks for your response! — Erin SC (@ErinsVB) March 19, 2019

We still have no clue how Matthew Dowd thinks eliminating the Electoral College would compel candidates to campaign in more states, not fewer.

Over time a brilliant system like the Electoral College is misunderstood and attacked by opportunists who want to win. It slowly erodes the protections granted by the founders of this country. We do not want to live in a country dominated by three cities more than we already do https://t.co/EKYQcQA2se — Tim Pool (@Timcast) March 19, 2019

Related: