For those who don’t agree with Leigh, here, please refute what she’s saying. How is she wrong? Why should Republican voters in California not matter. Why should Democrat voters in Alabama not matter?
For those who don’t agree with Leigh, here, please refute what she’s saying. How is she wrong? Why should Republican voters in California not matter. Why should Democrat voters in Alabama not matter?
For those who don’t agree with Leigh, here, please refute what she’s saying. How is she wrong? Why should Republican voters in California not matter. Why should Democrat voters in Alabama not matter?
For those who don’t agree with Leigh, here, please refute what she’s saying. How is she wrong? Why should Republican voters in California not matter. Why should Democrat voters in Alabama not matter?
Of course he currently doesn’t like it. He was told not to.why isn't it working for us??
For those who don’t agree with Leigh, here, please refute what she’s saying. How is she wrong? Why should Republican voters in California not matter. Why should Democrat voters in Alabama not matter?
The system is not designed to make every individual vote equally pivotal in every election. It is designed to select a president through a federation of states while still weighting population.
It treats the states as the primary units of presidential selection rather than reducing the country to a single national popular vote. This preserves the idea that the United States is a union of states, not simply a unitary national democracy. States retain a distinct voice in choosing the executive who will enforce federal law within their borders.
it protects the federal character of the Union, the relative influence of smaller states, geographic breadth in presidential politics, and a degree of insulation from pure popular-majority outcomes concentrated in a few high-population areas.
The system is not designed to make every individual vote equally pivotal in every election. It is designed to select a president through a federation of states while still weighting population.
It treats the states as the primary units of presidential selection rather than reducing the country to a single national popular vote. This preserves the idea that the United States is a union of states, not simply a unitary national democracy. States retain a distinct voice in choosing the executive who will enforce federal law within their borders.
it protects the federal character of the Union, the relative influence of smaller states, geographic breadth in presidential politics, and a degree of insulation from pure popular-majority outcomes concentrated in a few high-population areas.
Slavery and the Three-Fifths Compromise shaped the weight certain states received inside the Electoral College. The basic architecture (state-based electors, mixture of population and equality) was driven by the broader large-state/small-state and federalism disputes. Both things are true at once. Reducing the entire design to “a compromise to small population slave states” oversimplifies a set of overlapping bargains; ignoring the slavery dimension whitewashes a central moral and political reality of the founding.The system was unabashedly designed as a compromise to small population slave states. More to do with keeping things together and punting the slavery issue rather than high minded idealism.
Im sure that'll be offensive to many, but it's true.
It was a compromise. Otherwise we’d be Europe.This is good. We are the United STATES of America, not just America. The STATES select the president. As mentioned above, if you find 38 STATES that want to change it through our constitution, then I'm okay with it.
Slavery and the Three-Fifths Compromise shaped the weight certain states received inside the Electoral College. The basic architecture (state-based electors, mixture of population and equality) was driven by the broader large-state/small-state and federalism disputes. Both things are true at once. Reducing the entire design to “a compromise to small population slave states” oversimplifies a set of overlapping bargains; ignoring the slavery dimension whitewashes a central moral and political reality of the founding.
and make the number of electors per capita the same for every state.Do fractional allocation of electoral votes.
Didnt a republican win the popular vote last time?It's DEI for Republican candidates so unfortunately it will never change
For those who don’t agree with Leigh, here, please refute what she’s saying. How is she wrong? Why should Republican voters in California not matter. Why should Democrat voters in Alabama not matter?
California voters matter in California, Alabama voters matter in Alabama,... We function as a Democracy at state level and a republic at the federal level,... Every voter matters equally within their state and every state matters equally within our country...
Didnt a republican win the popular vote last time?
Lol.Outlier.
Republicans have won the popular vote twice in the last 30+ years.
For those who don’t agree with Leigh, here, please refute what she’s saying. How is she wrong? Why should Republican voters in California not matter. Why should Democrat voters in Alabama not matter?
Precisely. And smaller states would have no incentive to join a larger union when they knowingly would be forced to comply with the policies for larger, urban areas. They had to make a reasonable compromises, this was one of them.Without the electoral college, the voters in LA and NYC will disenfranchise EVERY Iowa vote, that's why
But if it isn't a one vote to one vote thing, isn't it actually giving the rural vote more power?Electoral college works because urban centers (blue) shouldn't have more power than rural voters (red).
People tend to forget that we are primarily a grouping of dissimilar states attempting to work together,.. We are not a singular country loosely carved up into a multitude of provinces or territories,... We are the original version of what the EU is.
You think people are forgetting that states exist?
Yes, so you are okay with doing away with the electoral college then?Didnt a republican win the popular vote last time?
If you mean proportional to the amount of votes received, I could be down with this, but it could and would cause many court cases over rounding.Do fractional allocation of electoral votes.
No,.. I think people are forgetting that states are the primary entities in this equation that we call a country.
California voters matter in California, Alabama voters matter in Alabama,... We function as a Democracy at state level and a Republic at the federal level,... Every voter matters equally within their state and every state matters equally within our country...
Why, wouldn't the votes "weigh" the same?Without the electoral college, the voters in LA and NYC will disenfranchise EVERY Iowa vote, that's why
No, my comment was to his, not the OP.Yes, so you are okay with doing away with the electoral college then?
We the farm land of America...Well f@ck me, I thought those entities were called citizens.
I wonder why the Declaration of Independence didn't start We The Area...
Well f@ck me, I thought those entities were called citizens.
I wonder why the Declaration of Independence didn't start We The Area...
us population/538....each state gets one elector for every 630,000 (or so) peopleThat's not true either.
Tiger Illustrated
CLEMSON FOOTBALL AUGUST CAMP: What we are hearing on transfer back Chris Johnson
Tiger Illustrated
CLEMSON FOOTBALL AUGUST CAMP: Our Wednesday update on true freshman QB Tait Reynolds
Tiger Illustrated
CLEMSON FOOTBALL AUGUST CAMP: Tuesday evening scrimmage nuggets
Tiger Illustrated
Our early August camp stock risers in Clemson - Part 2
Tiger Illustrated
CLEMSON FOOTBALL AUGUST CAMP: What we are hearing on Markus Strong, Chris Denson, Nolan Hauser & the WR - DB battles