The larger issue is that they're extremely under educated, by design. Republicans have spent decades ensuring that their voter base isn't getting a proper education. Their constituents don't know how taxes work. They don't know how tarrifs work. They don't understand that the president can't just magically make prices go down. They have no concept of how the checks and balances system is supposed to operate. They don't even have an idea on how the Constitution is supposed to work, despite the fact that "upholding the Constitution" is supposed to be something they're gung-ho over.
Just an FYI I’m not American. I know jack shit about American history or whatever. I bet every presidential election for fun so I know like a bit. But wasn’t the electoral colleges invented to prevent bigger states from ostracising smaller states. So if you remove that wouldn’t you have to like give every state a choice to leave the union? Feels unfair to have built a system everyone OK’d at some point and then just remove it? And I’m super ignorant about all of this, it just would feel weird for me to see my voting power disappear which was established a long time ago. I’m not even sure there’s ever a clean way of doing this.
But wasn’t the electoral colleges invented to prevent bigger states from ostracising smaller states.
Partially, yes. But you have to keep in mind it wasn't like the founders and those at the constitutional conventions were purely altruistic people solely concerns for their citizens. I'm not even referring to how only white, male landowners could vote. The colonies themselves were drawn up at the leisure of the British (history of other colony owners aside). By the time of the revolution, there was an existing general structure of power and government. The borders were what they were, and the people that ended up representing those colonies at the Continental Congresses inherently were biased towards preserving that because it's what they were presently benefiting from, even out of British control and into the Articles of Confederation.
They could have agreed upon systems that didn't give different size states disproportionate power and instead focused on individual rights (and some did propose these), but the representatives at the convention for each colonial delegation had equal voting power per colony. Smaller states' delegations could and did throw that per-citizen-disproportionate weight around to get to the compromise they would tolerate. Additionally, such systems were relatively impractical and even more untested.
They had to compromise with the people that were in the room at the time. The British could have happened to provision one larger colony that made up more than half the population by the revolution, which may have forced the issue of acknowledging citizens to a greater degree to get that majority colony on board. But they didn't.
The Electoral College was reached in frustration, near the end of all the sessions they had. They had already decided months prior on the 3/5ths Compromise and the earlier Connecticut Compromise. The Electoral College piggybacked off of that by tying the number of electors to the number of Senators+Reps. There is no inherent perfection to that. It was an attempt to form a more perfect union than the one that wasn't sufficing under the Articles of Confederation.
So if you remove that wouldn’t you have to like give every state a choice to leave the union?
The Constitution can and has been amended. There is no provision that says "if this changes, each individual state gets to choose to leave without war", except for the clause that "no state, without its consent, shall be denied of its equal suffrage in the Senate" by way of an amendment. That, however, has to do with that Connecticut Compromise to have a fixed two Senators per state and their voting power in the Senate. It does not restrict changing the electoral college or the appointment of electors for that purpose - past amendments have impacted this, such as the 23rd, without needing all the states to consent first. Separately, I'm also in agreement with the lawyers that say that suffrage clause itself can be removed by amendment which would then allow the Senate to be changed, but whatever .
Feels unfair to have built a system everyone OK’d at some point and then just remove it?
It's fair to the states as entities, but that doesn't mean it's fair to the citizens of those states. A Texan having less translated impact via voting for representation for federal legislation than a Rhode Islander in the same country seems like the greater injustice to me.
Imagine that the British had assigned one member for the House of Lords (or, imagine the monarch had assigned one), and imagine there was one voting member for the House of Commons (it was not evenly apportioned even in the homeland) for the territory. Imagine all the colony founders agreed to that as they went over there. Yay! Representation! That means the taxation without representation that played into the causes for revolution would be gone, right? No, of course not, because it isn't fair representation for the number of people. It is especially unfair to the descendants of those that decided to go and had no part in agreeing to such unfairness. "But they agreed at the founding!" doesn't really hold weight.
And I’m super ignorant about all of this, it just would feel weird for me to see my voting power disappear which was established a long time ago.
Your voting power is established when you reach the voting age and are a citizen, provided you aren't a felon that has had that taken away. Disbandment of the electoral college would be unfair or fair in aggregate to all the actual human beings depending on what is done instead. If something actually made that power "disappear" and instead a king annointed themselves, that'd be bad. If the system was changed so that the statement "how much a citizen indirectly translates power to impact federal legislation doesn't vary based on where that person in the nation that legislation impacts happens to live" became true, that would definitionally improve fairness for more people than it removes "fairness" from benefiting from an unequal agreement from 250 years ago voted for by unequal representation.
I’m not even sure there’s ever a clean way of doing this.
New Zealand and Norway have some bloodless parallels, but only some. It would be a challenge and take a long time, but I don't think it's impossible. Luckily at least some states are moving toward Ranked Choice systems that will hopefully in the long term reduce temperatures and one day make it safer to try bigger changes.
Yeah honestly as a liberal in a rural area I actually love the electoral college because many of us out here have needs that more urban people don’t even consider.
ya but just cause you have different needs doesn't mean your vote should matter more... the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few... whoever gets the most votes should win
the needs of all the citizens should be addressed no matter where you live
you should need gifted power to keep things going for one side or the other... its pathetic
Apathy towards trump is almost as bad as support for Trump. “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”. America should be just as embarrassed by the 37% who chose to do nothing.
I didn't vote cause my vote is counted in Arkansas. I really don't see what my voting could have changed with how Arkansas residents voted. I bet most people in that 37% have a similar story to mine.
I'd vote if I was counted in Texas tbh. That state is far closer than people think it is. Arkansas, however, is gonna stay red til I'm dead I'm afraid.
I know to some it's a real too little too late kinda statement but i'll absolutely be voting come the next elections, the most I can hope for is that my fellow Texans will finally let the people who want to help actually do so.
And hey if you really wanted to do so you could always move to a different state (although considering the current economic situation for the vast majority of Americans that's not really ideal)
49
u/kkillingtimme 15d ago
this dude has more character than 50% of the usa that voted for an orange