Quote:
Originally Posted by Lune
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
This is nonsense lol, the electoral college has roots in realpolitik during the formation of the union and its early years, used for various reasons such as enticing small or sparsely populated states into the union, and dealing with the balance of power between slave states and northern states during the era of the 3/5 compromise.
Eliminating the electoral college isn't pure democracy, it's still a representative republic, except the representatives and president are actually chosen by votes of equal power, rather than a Democrat in Georgia's vote being worth 1000x more than a Republican in California.
Stop pretending like it's about anything other than giving disproportionate power to voters in empty states. Yes, rural and metropolitan voters have different issues, but that doesn't mean rural voters should be given power over metropolitan voters. You seem happy with the belief that the electoral college 'protects' rural life, but you don't seem to give a fuck about what effect having presidents and senators chosen by a handful of ranchers in Wyoming has on the places where everyone actually lives, nor do you take issue with the fact that there are more Republicans in California than the entire Midwestern United States, and all their votes mean absolutely nothing.
|
Did you know there are elections that aren't national?!
Seriously, do you actually think ranchers in wyoming have outsized influence in national elections? That's what keeps you up at night? Yes, their votes are weighted more heavily because there are way fewer of them. It's meant as a counterbalance, so that urban centers don't dictate the outcome of every single national election.