Yeah, that wasn’t direct towards you mate. It was directed towards the politico article, which insinuated, like the most Democrat do, & basically anybody that’s anti-trump, that their first inclination of a Trump supporter is poor, dumb & white.

The electoral college does give more populous states more voting power.

There is nothing in the definition that means they should have even more power.
nor is it "obviously worse" to divide up the power away from pure populations centers a little bit to protect the rights and interests of people from other states.
You appear to be using circular reasoning.

There are legitimate pros and cons of both systems. im not a fan of either.

How would you handle voting?

One dollar per vote, just like it is in the board room.

Hes all fluff and trash talk these days. Must be stuck changing bedpans at his job.

49% of us went full blown...

The college gives citizens of populous states less voting power (than a democracy). It usurps voting power from citizens of populous and/or firmly red/blue states and gives it to unpopulous and/or battleground states. It distorts a citizen's voting power based arbitrarily on geographical location.

This post was edited by Voyaging on Oct 9 2017 08:12pm

sure it does. but it also ensures that a variety of locations, demographics and mentalities are exerting influence on the political landscape of the country, as opposed to the strict dominance of big coastal cities that you'd get with a (nationwide) proportional representation.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Oct 9 2017 08:16pm

You aren't interpreting what i said correctly. i know what the electoral college is.
it does give high pop states more voting power than lower pop states, even if its not completely proportional to the population. (ex: California has 55 while NC has 15. 55 is more than 15)

A simple thought experiment in which the country consists of 300 million citizens in a single coastal state and 1 million citizens spread across 10 rural midwest states. The distortion of voting power in such a country that our current electoral system would produce would be ludicrous. Citizens should not have votes thousands of times more valuable because they happen to live one place rather than another. Obviously extreme, but it illustrates the problem.

What we want to maximize is sufficient (and proportional) representation of ideology, not sufficient representation of arbitrary geographical location. You are right that we want to produce proportionality in representation, but the Electoral College has the opposite effect. It results in inferior proportionality than even a crude traditional democratic electoral system would produce.

There are loads of electoral systems that have already been devised by expert political scientists, mathematicians, and statisticians that have been instituted in other countries, and it's really a shame that we have made no attempt to implement any of them despite them being mathematically superior.

And this horrible electoral system is not merely in presidential voting. The system is garbage across the board.



Right, what I meant is that it gives them less voting power than a basic, simple democratic system would.

This post was edited by Voyaging on Oct 9 2017 08:24pm