<p>My son mentioned that NJ will award its electoral college based on the popular vote winner in the NATION not the winner of NJ.</p>
<p>Is he correct?</p>
<p>I live in NJ, am pretty sure it’s not true (never heard it before) and besides, it doesn’t make sense…why have a primary if nothing was based on it.</p>
<p>Thanks…that is what I told him. He was talking about the November delegates.</p>
<p>I have heard that Calif was considering something like this, but I have not heard anything like it in NJ. Given that NJ is a safe blue state and is controlled by Dems in Trenton, I doubt that they would want to jeopardize their electoral votes should a Republican win the pop vote in the nation.</p>
<p>Ah, Simba, reading issues for me (you mentioned electoral college in your OP.) But again, have not heard that here at all.</p>
<p>I think I may have crossed wires with my son. We might have been on different wavelengths.</p>
<p>[The</a> Associated Press: Plan Would Sidestep Electoral College](<a href=“http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gXClyqloROEiCW3qOj9HBMFjn00wD8UNKS582]The”>http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gXClyqloROEiCW3qOj9HBMFjn00wD8UNKS582)</p>
<p>Apparently there is a movement to put such a plan into effect nationwide and New Jersey has signed onto it, put it will only go into effect if enough states to total a majority of the electoral votes sign on to the plan. I had never heard about it either, so I Googled it.</p>
<p>I had heard about it, started to comment last night, but had not done my homework about what would trigger it. So, it is out there but very unlikely to ever take hold because of what the less populated states would lose in clout.</p>