You mean how it was ranting when it was the GOP and suddenly whining when it is the DEMs? Just shows bias.

Everyone likes to complain about the electoral college, but no one ever DOES anything about it. It's almost like there's a reason for its existence!

No there is a definite tonal difference - my own preference would be for the Democrats and their policies.

Please tell me what the reason is.

You'd need 3/4 of the states to agree to change the Constitution to get rid of it. That means you'd need pretty much all of the red states that like this undemocratic way of electing president. And they're not going to agree, because twice now in the last 16 years, they've been able to force their candidate on the majority of Americans against our will.

The EC is a throw back to the early days of our democracy, where we had no idea if it would even work, where we only elected the representatives and not the Senate and where each state was basically a separate entity (much like the European Union is now). That world no longer exists, and there is no logical reason why we should continue to run our lives like it was still 1786.

You don't think New Yorkers live differently from those in Wyoming?

If it's impossible to have Justice in America, better save those pennies to move.

Not to mention Kerry very nearly won the electoral vote in 2004 without the popular vote.

lol what?

So you think that people in Wyoming should have more of a say in how the COUNTRY is run than people in New York?

I think it's fair since it seems to alternate every 4-8 years. Why should the people of Wyoming always have to do what the people of NY want given how different life is there? Tyranny of the majority.

Because nobody fucking lives in Wyoming. So because some random people who still live like it's the 80's want more power and not to progress, that means we should listen to them?

Yes.

Obviously everyone needs to have an equal chance at success in America, but beyond that what sort of "progress" is still needed?

lol, what progress is still needed? Are we living in a fucking utopia and nobody knows about it but you?

Do you think people live the same in NYC as they do in Lake Placid?

Sure they do. So what does that have to do with anything?



Those of us who are patriots believe our job is to make the country better. That means not moving.



So?

So you prefer the tyranny of the minority like we have now, where a minority of people chose our leader?

Look, the president is supposed to represent PEOPLE not land. Who cares how many states there are? You need to add all the people of Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Nebraska (plus part of Minnesota) just to meet the population of New York city, much less all of New York state.



Besides, you know what one of the best reasons for getting rid of the electoral college is? We'd stop having "red states" and "blue states" because it won't matter which candidate wins the state. The only thing that will matter is who wins the country. That will help heal our divide more than anything else.

Ah ok. Thanks for the info.

Founders fear that the large states like New York and Virginia would dominate the executive branch of Government and also that candidates would skip rural areas to attain easier votes in large metropolitan areas. Similar to the House and Senate dynamic.

Have you ever heard of Chesterton's Fence? You should look it up and understand it. It is a useful tool for thinking through problems. And yes I know and can understand the reasons against the Electoral College.

Do you think we should get rid of the Senate? If not, why not? Why should Wyoming have two senators just like California?

If people could be counted on to consider what was best for the country, I think popular vote would be fine. As it stands though, Republican policies tend to be better for rural areas (this is debatable, but it's the current consensus) and Democrat policies benefit urban areas more (this is debatable, but it's the current consensus), and New Yorkers aren't going to vote for a Republican candidate because a coal miner in middle America will lose his job due to Democrat's environmental regulations.

But that coal miner's child will be able to live in a greener, healthier place.

Great. Riven with opioid addiction, early death, and unemployment but lots of green.

lol, the child would be born with an incurable disease, not covered by a republican plan, and die immediately after being born, in a hellscape on earth because republican policies gutted the environment.

There's nothin my wrong with protecting the environment, but it's not like slavery where we need to take drastic action immediately that harms the economy. Once we have reliable, profitable cleaner energy hopefully coal miners will be able to move to those jobs.

It's not harming the economy. We DON'T NEED COAL ANYMORE. We HAVE reliable, clean energy jobs. The solar panel market is skyrocketing. Coal mines have been shutting down for over a decade. This isn't new.

Yes, other energy options are now a profitable venture, but that would harm the status quo energy giants. I know this is an old story, but it is becoming more and more of a reality every year with developing technology.

One step at a time.

Yes, if I were starting the country over from scratch today, I would make the Senate based on population as well.

The government should represent people, not land, and states have enough autonomy now.