cross-posted from: https://kbin.social/m/[email protected]/t/488620
65% of U.S. adults say the way the president is elected should be changed so that the winner of the popular vote nationwide wins the presidency.
cross-posted from: https://kbin.social/m/[email protected]/t/488620
65% of U.S. adults say the way the president is elected should be changed so that the winner of the popular vote nationwide wins the presidency.
Doesn’t sound like you’re a conservative or believe in a republic.
A popular vote would mean the costal areas would have the largest vote and rural areas would get ignored.
It would quickly lead to a breakup up of the union.
I’m not.
I do. But ours is in need of reform to make it a better republic that more accurately reflects the will of the people.
That’s already what happens under the electoral college.
And every single other electected position in government goes by what is essentially a popular vote, if this was such a problem, all other positions would also be electoral college.
The U.S. is the only country that uses an electoral college. All other countries that exist, and are democratic republics use a popular vote and they’re just fine.
If a popular vote for presidency would cause the destruction of this country, why hasn’t popular vote for all other positions done so already? It’s because this is just fearmongering based on zero evidence. Actually it’s worse, because there is plenty of evidence it wouldn’t do this because of the aforementioned other countries that use popular vote.
Not sure you understand what a republic.
Every other vote is at a state level. What other position is elected nationally?
They’re not fine. They’re ok. America is unique and why we are the only super power.
We only do popular votes at the state level.
The level at which the election runs is not what I am getting at.
And they don’t destroy our country despite our states having a rural/urban divide. So our federal elections should be no different.
The level makes a difference. We are a combination of states.
Popular vote for the president would destroy our country. It’s not going to happen unless we are ready for the nation to break up. The smaller states will leave.
No it doesn’t. If a popular vote would destroy this country because of the imbalance between rural/urban areas, then it would have already done so on a state level.
You’ve yet to make compelling argument as to why we would change a system that works perfectly.
I’ve said it in several other places in this thread.
All votes should be counted equally.
It doesn’t work perfectly.
It makes it so that if you don’t live in a swing state, your vote is effectively meaningless. If you’re a democrat in a heavy republican state, then your vote will never go towards supporting your candidate of choice. If you’re a republican in a heavy republican state, the same applies. If you’re a republican in a heavy republican state, your vote also doesn’t do shit, because your state was going to vote republican anyway. Unless you’re in a swing state, the current system basically ignores you.
It also makes it so presidential candidates only ever cater towards swing states, and the cities within those swing states. All the rest of the states are basically ignored.
The electoral collage prevents third party candidates from ever having a chance because it is inherently a FPTP system, which inherently biases a two party system, which is a huge part of why our country is so fucked right now.
And on top of all of that, there have been several elections in which the candidate with the most votes has lost. That is a broken system.
That isn’t a compelling argument. It isn’t even a logical argument.
That isn’t a broken system. That is a system working as designed. You may not understand the perfection of the electoral college but you’ve yet to create a compelling reason to change it. The flaws you are mentioning are the strengths of the system.
What you want to do would require a constitutional amendment to change it and the smaller states would not allow that to happen for the reasons I have explained. It would negate their vote and we a government of 50 states, which means the states want to keep their power.
We are not a democracy, as our founding fathers understood the flaws. There is a reason we are still ticking while other nations have fallen or never prospered the way we have and part of that is by not allowing changes on a whim. The system was meant to move slowly and methodically. It was meant to have checks and balances.
While it isn’t perfect, it is a pretty damn good system. The most popular person shouldn’t be the one to win. It should be the one selected by the states through the electoral college. It allows the states to have a say in who becomes president.
Now if we could just remove the voting rights from poor people, we would be able to get this country back on track.
Popular doesn’t mean good. Joe won the popular vote and now we are all paying for his incompetence with rampant inflation. We can’t survive another four years of having such a popular president.