It’s Only Cheating If You Use The Definition Of The Word Cheating
William Jacobson’s “argument” on why changing (certain) states’ allocation of electoral votes to a congressional district plan isn’t cheating sounds a lot like the arguments used by Paul supporters when they were trying to usurp the delegate selection process last spring, with the obvious intention of pushing a candidate who didn’t get many votes. The Paultards’ argument was that what they were doing was (barely) within the letter of election law—even if it ended up, you know, disenfranchising the vast majority of a state’s Republican voters, and thus blatantly violating the spirit of the law. Jacobson is arguing that states have the right to change how electoral votes are allocated, therefore it’s not rigging the system. That this is only happening in swing states where Republicans have a majority of both chambers and thus can draw the lines of congressional districts to disenfranchise minority, urban, Democratic voters is apparently just one of God’s mysteries.