No. It would give control to the people. Each person's vote would count the same no matter where they lived. The states wouldn't have a goddamn thing to do with it anymore. Excuse me while I utterly fail to care about their deep-seated feelings that their votes should count more than mine. One could easily construct an argument on the same grounds that ANY group should get extra representation so they don't "feel disenfranchised". There is a historical reason why rural areas have extra power. There is no reason to continue that forever just because it made sense in the 1700s. Times have changed. Minority rule isn't a recipe for long-term stability. I strongly disagree with you on that. Mt Tabor at dawn? barfo
Nah. I’ll just ignore you as usual. Democrats seem to have a deep-seated feelings on this topic. I suspect it’s because they want to have a monopoly on the presidency. There are two paths towards that end: amend the constitution or get a broad enough base in enough states to win the EC on a regular basis. The US is not a pure democracy by intent. It’s going to take a lot more than continuous whining about it in order to change it. Actually, there is that third option where states sign on to give all of their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote. Oily, but a possible avenue. Edit: BTW, the EC loss by Hillary’s campaign had the effect the founders intended. This time Biden’s actually spending time in the Midwest and paying attention to the needs of the people in that area. If Hills could have been bothered to do so, she’d be president.
Could you elaborate on why food and natural resource production should mean greater voting power? I mean, why not greater voting power for nurses or firefighters? Or factory workers or uber drivers or ??? barfo
And it's one man one vote isn't it? Should a minority tell the majority what to do? I don't know what to do about the small states being marginalized but I just can't get over the fact that a President of all the people ought to be determined by all the people.
If texas keeps trending blue with all the new transplants as it seems, it's going to be increasingly harder for any gop candidate to be become president again. Texas is the most populous red state. 36-40 electoral votes going blue would go a long way in having the electoral college reflect the popular.
All the Conservatives that yell in glee that people are 'fleeing' California might get a surprise, is what you say... It's a silent revolution, we are moving to your states to steal the election. Boohaahaa
This isn’t some new thing Lanny. The Electoral College has been in operation since 1776. It’s not going to change just because Democrats have been pouting over Hillary for the past four years. You really need to update that one ”man” one vote line. That hasn’t been accurate since 1920.
The GOP is going to have to reinvent itself in the near future if they want to remain competitive nationally. Trump has set them back a long ways. Their reliance on the religious right is becoming stale. They are going to have to find a new message and better leaders. It will happen, but it won’t be quick.
Small states would never have agreed to join the Union at all without the split legislature, the electoral college, and the separation of powers into three branches.
Where did I mention Hillary? Are you replying to me or what you think are pouting Democrats? Are you trying to explain our Constitution and how it pertains to the Electoral College to me? Of course one man one vote isn't accurate. That's exactly my point. Next time try to make more sense.
Not to mention the massive majority of college educated blue voters under the age of 40. The problem is voter engagement with this demographic.
100% correct. Now that they're here they want to stay here. It's a pretty good place to grow up and live your life in.
I hate how people keep mentioning Hillary with negative connotations. First of all, the only people who keep bringing her up are MAGAs, and second, she was a damn good candidate with decades of experience serving in multiple facets of government and was highly educated and respected on the global stage. They treat her like some failed wife from the swamp. Just irritates me to no end when people ignore her terrific credentials. Back to what my mom says whenever we see her name evoked: people can't respect strong women. Just an unequivocal fact.
That is absolutely true. At the time, tho, it made sense to have outhouses and not internal plumbing - because the smell was horrible. The invention of the P joint solved that problem and all of a sudden having a toilet in the house was a huge upgrade. What was right for the 1700s can and often is a hinderance in the 21st century.
