A survey of 800 New York voters conducted on December 22-23, 2008 showed 79% overall support for a national popular vote for President.

By gender, support was 89% among women and 69% among men.

By age, support was 60% among 18-29 year olds, 74% among 30-45 year olds, 85% among 46-65 year olds, and 82% for those older than 65.

Support was 86% among Democrats, 66% among Republicans, 78% among Independence Party members (representing 8% of respondents), 50% among Conservative Party members (representing 3% of respondents), 100% among Working Families Party members (representing 2% of respondents), and 7% among Others (representing 7% of respondents).

http://nationalpopularvote.com/pages/polls.php#NY_2008DEC

The congressional district method of awarding electoral votes (currently used in Maine and Nebraska) would not help make every vote matter. In NC, for example, there are only 4 of the 13 congressional districts that would be close enough to get any attention from presidential candidates. . In California, the presidential race is competitive in only 3 of the state's 53 districts. A smaller fraction of the country's population lives in competitive congressional districts (about 12%) than in the current battleground states (about 30%) that now get overwhelming attention, while two-thirds of the states are ignored Also, a second-place candidate could still win the White House without winning the national popular vote.

The State Electoral College representation is made up of the number of Congressional Representatives, plus US Senators (2). Right now it's winner take all. I suggest we make it by congressional district plus the two Senate votes go by state plurality. This would force presidential candidates to contest by Congressional Districts and get rid of the "swing" state strategy,
Richard Wagner

A major problem with the electoral college is the very concept of its "winner take all" regime. It suppresses the level of voting in non-battleground states.

Many conservatives in a deep blue states do not vote in presidential elections, because they know that their vote will not matter, given the lopsided liberal majority. They stay home.

Same with liberal voters in deep red states. The "winner take all" rule will force all electoral votes to be cast to the conservative, based on a simple majority. Why bother voting?

This is the de facto problem with the electoral college system. It's a civics problem.

I'm 60 yrs old, living in NYC. I've never felt my vote mattered for any presidential election since I've been alive.

Yes, Albany, like most of New York, is west of the Hudson.

this is silly, don't the people in the bronx have real problems he can work on?

Brian, I just wanted to comment about your "across the Hudson comment" Trenton and Albany are both West of the Hudson