New book "Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point"

A reminder:

 

So did the SC and Virginia electors deviate from the popular vote of there state?

 

There was no popular vote in South Carolina. And yes in the case of Virginia.

 

The United States, born as a secessionist phenomenon, violently shut the door on secession thereafter.

 

So that’s what your grievance and desire to do away with the EC is based on? Two obscure instances from over 100 years ago?

You know, people would probably respect you more if you just came clean and said that your desire is based solely on the point that you think it would help Democrats win more presidential elections because NY and California would be so lopsided.

 

can you say more about this? NY & Cali have NO VOTE. I think you know that. You are talking about American citizens, no? Why does what state they live in matter TO YOU?

 

Wait so the US congress has not been dysfunctional for at least two decades now?

 

What do you mean NY and Cali have no vote?

Correct me if I’m wrong but you initially seem to support popular vote and rid of the EC?

 

Most who want to abolish the EC want a national popular vote. In that case NY and Cal would skew the national numbers.

 

No, I put out my grievance pretty clearly, which was not based on those incidents (you just kept asking me about them for some reason). My grievance is that most people don't matter in Presidential campaigns. That both parties ignore them and will continue to do so. I'd prefer an election where residence in a state doesn't make you matter or not matter to those running for office. Most Republicans and Democrats don't matter in federal elections.

If you want to actually discuss my issues with the electoral college, feel free to read my post in post #22. Let me know if you have any questions.

BTW, to the rest of your post, I actually expect that NY and California would become less lopsided because Republicans would have an incentive to try to turn out their voters in both states (and try to recruit supporters in those states). Same as Democrats in many states.

 

"Skew" is not the correct word for allowing each person to have an equal vote. Skewing is what happens when you decide who should receive more or less power. Like you appear to want to do.

 

Yeah, he's got it backwards.

 

Republic. Not a democracy.

The nation was founded by sovereign territories agreeing to be bound by certain terms to preserve some of their sovereignty and identity, in exchange for common defense, currency, infrastructure and sundry other benefits ftom being part of a nation. That's why we remain the united STATES...and not just America, or some other name intended to identify a nation comprised of individuals.

What y'all are disparaging as 'tyranny', is nothing more than the benefit of the bargain which the composite member states bargained for, in exchange for surrendering some of their sovereignty.

TBL, as usual, it's the Leftist authoritarian tyrannists who want to deconstruct the protections of the individual states, in order to subjugate the lesser states to the rule (and tyranny) of the bigger, *more enlightened*, properly indoctrinated, subjects of the new orthodoxy.

Yet again, the forefathers proved incredibly prescient.

 

Apologies. I did a very poor job of communicating my pt. The pt I was trying & failing to make was if we went by popular vote, I reject the notion that NY & Cali would have undue influence. I don't understand what that means. Are you saying "they'd" have more influence b/c so many PEOPLE live there? That is not a state having influence. That's people having an influence.

 

EC was set up expressly to give more power to fewer people, and in those days, especially Virginia. Slave states compromised for EC in exchange for Virginia pols winning Virginia was uber-California. California has less sway than Wyoming today.

 

skew? That’s where the most PEOPLE live.

 

NYC and many cities of CA are the most dense populations in our country.
It’s no secret that those cities heavily vote one way. Its normal for that to happen with groups of people.

So the argument is because of those very dense populated cities, they would virtually make states with much smaller populations seem as if their voice means nothing.

The EC is not perfect but it’s the best we got to keep cities like NYC and CA deciding who our president is every election.

 

Each person would have the exact same power. A voter in Wyoming would have the same power as a voter in New York or California. Right?

 

The Founding Fathers weren’t big on voting. And some looked on democracy in 1789 France in horror.

 

Tangential …

"Escape Liberal Hell": Oregon, Washington Republicans Flee PNW, Join California Conservatives In Idaho | ZeroHedge