You're making a abstract comment; the reality is that the system we have is 1) based on the deal made to knit the country together 225 years ago and 2) held in place by the limits that exist in amending the Constitution. How are you going to convince the small states to give give up their over-sized roll in Presidential selection through the Electoral College?

make the country unworkable unless and until a new republic is founded.

we are a revolutionary people, borne of struggle and resistance.

time for a new struggle and new resistance.

Our forebears fought a war to escape a monarchy, a civil war to bring down slavery, engaged in non-violent resistance to combat Jim Crow and to end the insanity that was Vietnam.

"Make the country unworkable"..."time for a new struggle'"

What EXACTLY are you calling on people to do?

That said, neither movement got started by venting on an anonymous blog. They were expressions of common concern; I would hazard a guess that Federal voting rights aren't on the minds of more than a handful of people today.

one has to be the change that one seeks. One begins with consciousness raising. Yours could use a little, I think.

...but as someone who deals with reality, I have a good sense of what issues can be addressed today in our current political environment. Since you're the person who seems to believe a spark needs to be lit, I'll leave it to you to get things started.

The way the Constitution is set up, if a Constitutional convention is held then each state will receive an equal number of votes. Please find a map of Trump's electoral victory and ask yourself, if that group gets together and reshapes the Republic, what is it going to look like?

Well, I'll tell you what it will look like.

No abortion.
No women's rights.
No gay rights.
No minority rights.
English Only.
No birth control.
No government-funded health care.
No public assistance.
Mandatory membership in an approved religion.
Deportation or worse for Muslims and members of any Eastern religion.
Full citizenship only for married Christians.

The Republic we have is not perfect, but it's far better than the theocracy we'll be facing if Trump's supporters get the chance to remake the government in their image.

That's a serious problem.

California has 12% approximately of the population of the US but only 2 senators meaning our representation, California's representation in the electoral college does not begin to represent us fairly.

This is a very serious matter.

The compromise that led to the electoral college in the writing of the Constitution was perhaps appropriate at that time (although it was intended to protect slave states which makes it pretty abominable from the get-go), but it is no longer tenable.

If we get another Trump who is elected by only a minority of voters, the problem will become even more evident to those of us who live in California.

We love our country, but does our country love those of us who live and vote in California?

Seems to me the rest of the country needs to ask itself how important California is to the Union. Because if we aren't important enough to have the right to have our votes really count in presidential elections, then maybe we aren't wanted in the Union. Are we wanted or not? Would the rest of America prefer a country without us?

If we are wanted in the US, then why shouldn't we be given an equal vote and voice in electing the president?

I also know all those three-vote and four-vote states that keep sticking us with Republican presidents are NOT going to give up that power.

It's interesting to look at a table of population to representation. Here's one I found:
https://www.thegreenpapers.com/Census10/FedRep.phtml?sort=Hous#table
I don't know how accurate the data is, but I give them the benefit of the doubt.

It looks like in general smaller, less urban states have significantly poorer
ratios of population to representative ... but not absolutely. It's probably a dependency
of district lines for house seats having to be drawn inside a state boundary, because
of constitutional rules. There's really no reason to do that any more (but it's the
law.) Drawing districts across state lines to balance the population better would probably put more
Republicans in the House - the extra districts would have to come from somewhere, and
would draw off a few Democratic state districts.

it on line.

But I know human nature and more than average about history, and this is going to cause problems in our country at some point in the future.

But there's more to it than that. I don't believe there are any ground rules
in the constitution (Art. 5) for the convention. It's not clear that congress or the supreme
court would have any jurisdiction over it. It really could be a wild ole party.

On the other hand, it would be an incredible opportunity. The constitution
we have is pretty flawed, in so many ways.

Because there are no ground rules or controls I don't think a convention
can be set up in a way that would give it the authority it would need to
have its proposed changes ratified. It would never get to the starting line.

Constitutional convention than Dems. Republicans hold a much greater majority of State governments. Need 2/3 of States to call a Constitutional Convention. Look at map and it’s scary red.

That Trump's supporters will be able to force a constitution down the throats of the rest of the people? That we would just sit there and let that happen as if we have no options except to be ruled by the Trumpistas?
That would be the end of the Union.

A Constitutional Convention can be called by a vote of two-thirds of the states. We have 50 states, so that's 34 states.

Once this Convention is held, any amendment can be placed in the Constitution by a vote of three-quarters of the states, or 38 of them.

The rest of this comes from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_state_legislatures
As of right now, there are 32 state legislatures that are in Republican control.

In 2018, the following legislatures could fall into purely Republican hands: Alaska, Colorado, Maine, Oregon, Virginia and Washington.

Kennetha, if that happens they could very well turn this country into a theocracy by Easter Sunday.

Of course a constitutional convention would be raucous and chaotic.

Forming a new nation is always that way. But the large states would have extraordinary leverage in such a convention, not the poor, rural, hardly populated states. Because it would now be the poor rural states that were desperate for union. The large prosperous costal states can easily walk away. Nebraska cannot.

that would be against their narrow interests.

Each state can amend their own constitution to award all their EC votes to the winner of the popular vote -- contingent on states comprising an EC majority having adopted the same amendment.

This would require far fewer states than necessary to pass an amendment to the US Constitution.

Might move there, if they take geezers

They’re trying to get prospective mommies to make more babies, but the e-citizen applications far outstrip the birth rates