Jess Wegman’s book is an extensive reflection on the 2016’s US presidential election and the American electoral system. On November 2016, Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, surprised and shocked the entire world with its election as president. Even though, Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nomi-nee, won the popular vote, Trump secured his election by winning in the Electoral College.
This result arose many critics against this system that attributes, in each state, all the electors to the candidate that wins the state’s popular vote, even if with a slight margin. This system is against the idea that all votes are equal and clearly suggests that for presidential candidates it is better to concentrate on certain states who can offer a major number of electors, because 270 is the number of electors to win to obtain a majority of electoral votes and become president. Therefore, the adoption of the Electoral College is what makes several votes meaningless. Wegman is interpreting the desire of many Ameri-can that support the idea of abolishing the Electoral College and replacing it with a national popular vote, because it is unbearable that the weight of a citi-zen’s vote depends on where he lives.

This was fabulous. I dislike the EC for a number of reasons, not just because of Trump. It was well researched, and I learned a lot. I'm only sorry I waited so long to read it.

In regular election years in the U.S., the elector's vote is a formality, a reaffirmation of the popular vote. Until it doesn't match, and you end up with a President who was not voted for by the majority.

"The problem was that the Electoral College has almost never operated as Alexander Hamilton pictured it would."

Since the formation of the Electoral College in 1797, there have been over 700 attempts to change or reform it. In this book, the author uses his extensive knowledge of U.S Politics to put forward his case for abolition.

One of the most interesting things I took from it was learning about the three-fifths clause. Slaves were counted as three-fifths of a free white person for the purposes of representation in Congress. This gave slaveholding states more representatives, more influence in picking a President, and therefore more of a reason to support slavery. In 1790, Virginia & Pennsylvania had almost the same number of free white men, but Virginia had 300,000 slaves and therefore 6 more house seats, 6 more Presidential electors.

It's an incredibly interesting look at how and why the College was established, what the intended purpose was, and how it could be better. If you, like myself, became more than a little familiar with John King and his magic wall during last November's Presidential Election, you will have heard terms like "battleground states", "mob rule", or "flipped states". This doesn't go as far as to dumb it completely down so if you're totally unfamiliar with U.S. Politics you might not like something this detailed, but if you have a passing interest this is written really well and flows like a story.

Jesse Wegman demystifies the Electoral College in his new book, Let the People Pick the President: The Case for Abolishing the Electoral College. No, really. He lays out all the myths I thought were true and some I didn’t. Then Wegman puts every one of them in perspective, clearly and even humorously. I finished the book ready to explain and argue points that previously felt unexplainable.

As so many recent political books do, Wegman begins with the post-election fugue state of late 2016. He reminds us of that possible option called “faithless Electors,” who are members of the Electoral College who decide not to vote as expected. Not that it actually went down that way. But for some, it was the most coverage of this voting scheme they’d seen.

Despite the reference to 2016, Wegman makes clear that the issues of a Presidential popular vote aren’t partisan. Different folks embraced this change at different times. For example, Democratic Senator Birch Bayh worked on changes in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Then Democrats tried after the Bush v. Gore election in 2000. Next was Republicans during the eight years Obama was in office. Both sides of the aisle see the downsides to the Electoral College.

Part of the reason for its bipartisan nature is that the history of the electoral college encompasses various belief sets. To help readers understand, Wegman uses documents from America’s founding fathers. I remember a fair amount about Jefferson, Hamilton, and Madison. But James Wilson was essentially new to me, even though he played a big role in this story. The idea of more than just two political parties makes an appearance here as well. As do issues of slave holding, rural voters, and enfranchisement of Black people and women.

Wegman also reminds us that virtually every other type of election is won or lost on the popular vote. We elect Governors, Senators, U.S. Representatives, and even school board members that way. It’s only the Presidential election that steps out of the pattern. Some smart folks found a way revise our voting without amending the Constitution. Wegman explains that too. And, his case for letting the people pick the President is airtight.

My conclusions
I read a lot of political books. Rarely are they this down to earth and approachable. If you espouse a popular vote methodology, you must be sure all kinds of people can grasp the change. So, Wegman writes with humor and straightforward explanations.

One of the reasons I read this book was because of We are Indivisible, which I read a few months back. In that book, they also make the case for abolishing the Electoral College. But it’s just one portion of a much larger narrative. I wanted more, and Wegman delivered in spades. In fact, I could easily read it one more time to commit the details to memory more completely.

As it happens, I listened to the audiobook for part of my reading. Wegman does a great job of using inflection and tone to convey his meanings. His narration makes the details easier to digest.

I recommend this to all my political wonk friends and readers. But what I really want is for every voter, or potential voter, to read this. If you feel like your vote doesn’t count, here’s the solution. Plenty of states are on board with the changes that Wegman explains. And isn’t it time our Presidential choice reflect the will of all the people, not just some of them?

Pair with We are Indivisble: A Blueprint for Democracy after Trump by Ezra Levin and Leah Greenberg. For an alternate political escapade, try The Other Queen by Philippa Gregory. It will remind you why our founding fathers rebelled against England’s monarchy.

Acknowledgements
Thanks to NetGalley, St. Martin’s Press, and the author for the opportunity to read a free digital ARC of this book in exchange for this honest review.

I chose this book for the timely subject matter and assumed it would be kind of dry, but it wasn't at all. It's a fascinating look at how the electoral college was conceived and why it was inserted into the Constitution.
It was interesting to see how this election system has worked throughout our young nation's history and to have it only confirm my own opinion that it should be done away with and changed to a true popular vote. I know not everyone agrees.

Very good and I highly recommend it no matter what your opinion.

This is an excellent overview of the electoral college. In the book, the author presents the history of the college throughout the years, the problems encountered within the college and proposed ways to remedy the situation. He does present some interesting ideas. First, both parties, though at different times, want or have wanted to move away from this system, though many might not admit it. The best thing to do, he contends is to use the popular vote to elect the president, which is how the founding fathers meant things to occur. This way, many voters who now feel disaffected by the system and that their vote really does not even count can be brought on board and begin fulfilling their duty to vote. However, this may require a constitutional amendment, which makes it a hard choice. He also discusses choosing the electoral votes based on the popular vote within each state, which might be an easier (though perhaps not permanent) solution. The big takeaway for me was the overview of how the electoral college came to be with the reasons it was chosen presented along with a good discussion of why it may no longer be the best way to go and some of the rationale behind it that may or may not still be relevant, depending on your opinions, as well as a solid discussion of how to fix the problem. Some may think this book is merely sour grapes after the 2016 election and the current incumbent, but I did not see it that way. The author definitely has researched his topic and presents it in a very organized, thoughtful way, which will make the reader hopefully sit up and take notice. I highly recommend the book. I received this from NetGalley to read and review.

This read started off promising. I read about the first 20% in one sitting and was interested in the topic. However, shortly after I started this book, the COVID-19 pandemic started and I lost pretty much all willpower with wanting to read a non-fiction book, let alone one dealing with the flawed Electoral College system of the United States. This book is well-detailed and depicts the history of the electoral college from the period of time when the US Constitution was drawn up all the way up to the 2016 election and it's aftermath.

I gave this book 3 stars, but in another time and place I probably would have enjoyed it more and given it 4 stars. It was quite interesting, but just didn't hold my interest. This clearly isn't the book or the author's fault but a result of my frame of mind while trying to read it.

REVIEW—Let the People Pick the President | Jesse Wegman

In “Let the People Pick the President,” Jesse Wegman argues for the abolition of the current system for choosing our chief executive: the Electoral College. Wegman’s new book, an expanded version of a New York Times editorial of the same name, is part history, part myth-busting treatise. The author’s bias is noted, left-leaning, and surfaces occasionally, but as he says: the democratic value of “one person, one vote”—codified in Reynolds vs. Sims on March 18, 1963—ought to be nonpartisan. We each want our vote to matter, regardless of who we are, what we believe, or where we live.

Through his clear and memorable writing, Wegman guides the reader through the history of the Electoral College: its founding at the eleventh hour as the most-discussed single topic of the Constitutional convention through contested presidential elections and the expansion of voting rights over the next 200+ years. He shows how the Electoral College has served to entrench political power in a two-party system, and introduces some historical figures involved in the over 700 attempts to reform or abolish it.

Wegman’s strongest addition mirrors John Koza’s "Every Vote Equal": a section dispelling common myths about the Electoral College. He writes this section as a conversation between himself and a hypothetical family member who is not as familiar with the College, showing how Wegman would address each counterargument to installing a national popular vote.

In order to change something, you must first understand it. “Let the People Pick the President” helps to unpack the convoluted US presidential election system. Regardless of your political leanings, you will come away with a better understanding of US history, presidential elections, and the debate around a fundamental democratic question: Who gets to pick the President?

Overall: A well-researched and persuasive argument for amending a critical facet of US democracy. ★★★★★.

Thank you to NetGalley and St. Martin's Press for the opportunity to review this book in exchange for my honest review.

Jesse Wegman has written a strong and convincing book about why the Electoral College should be abolished and why the president should be elected by the popular vote. Wegman gives a detailed history about the creation of the Electoral College and the context for its creation. The College was the last agenda item on the Constitutional Convention’s agenda. Most of the Framers were ready to go home and the College became a “Frankenstein Compromise” between the Framers who wanted Congress to pick the president and the ones who wanted a direct popular vote. The author introduces readers to one Framer who becomes the spiritual godfather of the popular vote movement, James Wilson. I for one was not familiar with him, he has an interesting backstory.

Readers will also learn about the last major effort that almost ended the Electoral College which occurred in 1969/1970 and was led by Senator Birch Bayh.

The most effective parts of Wegman’s book is when he turns common talking points or myths about the Electoral College on their heads. For example, the idea that one party prefers the president to be chosen by the Electoral College while the other wants it abolished is not true. Both parties have been in support of keeping the institution at different times. Whichever political party feels that they benefit the most from the Electoral College tends to be its biggest defender.

He also covers the National Popular Vote Compact, an Electoral College workaround, where states who represent at least a majority of the electoral votes pledge to send electors who will vote for the national popular vote winner even if that winner did not win the popular vote in their state. Wegman does a great job covering the merits and the deficiencies of the compact and provides a thorough overview of the support it has slowly received over time. It will be an interesting test to see what happens if the requisite number of states sign to the compact and if there's any political fallout from it.

Wegman’s chapter dispelling the myths of the popular was also particularly strong. He shows, contrary to popular belief, that voters in big cities would not swamp voters in small towns because there are less big city voters compared to everyone else.

The strongest argument for moving to a national popular vote, whether that be through the compact or constitutional amendment, is that more voters would participate since they would actually count unlike in the Electoral College system where if you are a Democrat in Mississippi or a Republican in Massachusetts your votes essentially does not count.

Wegman’s book is a great historical treatment of the Electoral College and makes a strong case why the popular vote is a better option.

First and foremost, a large thank you to NetGalley, Jesse Wegman, and St. Martin’s Press for providing me with a copy of this publication, which allows me to provide you with an unbiased review.

The current selection process for the election of the American president is undemocratic, argues Jesse Wegman in his book. While the Founding Fathers devised the Electoral College to keep the general public from skewing the results with their uneducated choices, they did so at a time that differs greatly from today. This arcane means of election is, as Wegman argues, unknown or misunderstood by many Americans even today. In the early part of his tome, Wegman explores the situation in colonial America that led the Founders to create this buffer system for election of their leader, as well as the arguments at the time. The Founders were not unanimous, though the strongest proponent of direct and popular election of the president—James Wilson—has fallen out of the history books for reasons Wegman presents in Chapter 1. Use of this Electoral College—which allocates all of the state’s electors (totalling the number of their representatives and senators sent to Congress) for the candidate who wins the most votes on Election Day—tended to create situations where certain factions or regionally populous areas could be powerhouses in choosing the winner. Even still, as Wegman argues, the discrepancies between a large state (California) and small one (Wyoming) actually benefits the smaller one in voting power, should one look at the population representation. Throughout history, this Electoral College has created some noticeable issues when it came to choosing the president (1800 being the first and largest soap opera for 200 years). Additionally, there were times (five in total) where the Electoral College winner did not capture the popular vote, meaning fewer people voted for the winner. In layman analysis, Wegman seeks to argue that the Electoral College promoted racial divide and national division, with the power-holders refusing the give up the advantage to level the playing field. However, much as many of the modern versions of racism and xenophobia in American politics, it is shrouded in loosely cobbled together arguments that make it smell more like a rose than the pile of dung it truly tends to be. Wegman explores some of the momentum to abolish the Electoral College, including a constitutional amendment that was begun in the late 1960s, but failed to pass muster in the strong US Senate. More recently, there has been a movement to shift talk to using the popular vote and yet still staying within the constitutional framework in which the Electoral College resides. Making ‘every vote equal’ seems to make sense on some level, but the arcane machinery in use is wrapped in that constitutional bow that many feel is too sacred to touch. After most presidential elections, the Electoral College gets an op-ed or two before disappearing for four years, only to rear its ugly head while many Americans (and people around the world) are baffled with how it all works. Wegman’s arguments are worth exploring and I would recommend anyone with an interest in the political machine of elections seek to read this, preferably before November 2020.

Many would say this book was penned as sour grapes after the 2016 election, or even those who are still smarting from 2000. However, even the current POTUS espoused the undemocratic nature of the Electoral College over popular vote in his Tweets from on High, until he realised the College (and the Russians) helped him defeat the system. Wegman argues throughout the book that the College failed masterfully in 2016, by allowing the candidate the system was designed to block to rise to victory. A filtered choice should have kept mob rule from choosing unqualified people to serve, and yet this is what happened. By unqualified, Wegman (and I... even the Founding Fathers) argues that it is someone who rides the waves of the politically detached elector, rather than he/she who is connected to the machinery and understands governing. The chapters in this tome are laid out clearly and allow for a layperson’s understanding, mixing history with modern discussions without going down an overly academic rabbit hole. It seeks not only to offer issues and blatant criticisms, but provides solutions to both sides of the argument. Wegman pulls no punches in arguing for the abolition of the Electoral College, feeling that the people should have the right to choose their president directly. Much like some of the Founding Fathers’ original ideas (male-only suffrage, slavery), the Electoral College was something that worked in late 18th century, but has outlived its usefulness. At a time when most of the Western World prefers the people to speak in as democratic a way as possible, one can hope that America will follow (or lead with a powerful statement) and dismantle or rejig the Electoral College to reflect the popular sentiment. Perhaps then it would truly be collegial!

Kudos, Mr. Wegman, for opening my eyes to this topic, which has long been of interest to me. As I sit inside a parliamentary democracy which has its own popular vote issues, I am always open to discussions of electoral reform!

A good primer on the history of the Electoral college and arguments for why it should be abolished. A little pie-in-the-sky but pretty good across the board for what the author sets out to do.