In her March 19 op-ed, “Popular vote is what Americans want, and it’s what will work” (Page A5), Jill Ward made self-serving assessments that are totally off base and flatly wrong.

To be accurate, the popular vote for president is what Democrats want, as twice they have come up on the short end of the electoral count despite their candidate winning the popular vote.

She further writes that Americans are tired of presidential elections focusing on the larger battleground states. What makes her believe that candidates will pay any attention whatsoever to a state with as few votes as ours or any other small state rather than the big fish like California and New York? Currently, Maine has four electoral votes that are separated by district, therefore prompting candidates to venture north, knowing these four votes could make a difference.

Ms. Ward further writes that two-thirds of the country end up as bystanders in the current system. If we dump the electoral system, then 96 percent of the country will be bystanders, as two states will elect future presidents.

In the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton garnered 2.9 million more votes than Donald Trump. A closer look reveals she received nearly 6 million more votes in California and New York alone. If my limited math skills are accurate, that means Donald Trump received 3 million more votes in the remaining 48 states. This is precisely why our Founding Fathers established this system, so as to prevent the larger states from dominating national politics.

In a recent WGME-TV interview, state Sen. Troy Jackson made a comment regarding this very issue, stating that the presidential vote should be winner take all. Doesn’t that contradict his stance on Maine’s ranked-choice voting?

Steven Edmondson
Topsham