• Dem introduces bills to eliminate Electoral College, stop presidents from pardon
    33 replies, posted
Which, after all these years of it being this way, is why the Government has gradually drifted to represent the fucked up backwards opinions of the rural electorate. Because let's be honest, most of them are the only remaining group who thinks the sun shines out of Trump's flabby arse.
The problem I see with this is, if we acknowledge that the reason it exists is because some states are just so vastly different from the interests of the majority of the country, then the electoral college is still a shitty solution. The electoral college does nothing to ensure that rural states and the population dense states are equally represented, it just gives both an approximately equal chance to win. At that point, you might as well replace the system with a coin flip, or predetermine the results so it flips side every election. And of course if any new parties show up that also claim to be so vastly different from the other parties that they couldn't possibly be governed by the other parties, all future elections should give an equal 33.3% chance to all three parties.
The idea that the framers wanted decentralized power is a foolish, selective interpretation of history. For sure, some of the framers like Jefferson believed in that ideal but many disagreed with him, such as Adams and Hamilton. if the framers wanted decentralized power the federalist party would not have existed at all.
Literally every other country has to deal with these differences and they get around it without holding elections in a system that only has the facsimile of democracy. Really? You can't call a system where everyone has one vote that is counted the same democratic? I'm going to need an explanation for this one because simply saying it's true just won't suffice. Of course it's not, but you are putting words in his mouth and lying about what he said. What he said was elitism is this idea that rural areas deserve more representation than non-rural areas, and concerns from those in non-rural areas or even just people who want a more fair system are just the unreasonable, illogical ravings of people mad because Trump won. You, explicitly, value the thoughts and opinions of rural people over non-rural people. That's elitism, and it's not at all surprising to be seen coming from the person who finds a way to blame the Democrats and defend the Republicans at every possible juncture. Couching this in terms of states and cities running is sophistry, designed to make your argument look more powerful than it actually is with emotive gestures of domination. LA and New York wouldn't dominate the national government, people in those cities and states would have their opinions represented in national government, which is how democracy works. What if he supported abolishing the EC before the 2016 election? I'm not mad Conscript, I'm just disappointed [citation needed] As already mentioned, patently dishonest and disingenuous. Half of the framers favored a centralized government which is why we got the sort of compromises we did. Stop revising history to try and make your argument for modern day politics more palatable.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.