Originally
posted by
Xintros:
I've gained renewed faith in the Democratic process..
really? We need to stop pretending our process is (small case d) democratic.
60,467,601 votes for Hillary Clinton
60,072,551 votes for Donald Trump
Yet it's the Electoral College and not the vote total that decides the next President:
Donald Trump 290
Hillary Clinton 238
No matter your political persuasion, can we agree this very un-democratic process is effed up?
Can we move the USA into the 21st century and demand this be corrected before 2020 so we can call it a democratic election w/out cringing in embarrassment or ignorance?
Let's look at the 'democratic' process of the Electoral College, in particular looking for proportional representation of our votes. Because without that, it's not a fair election.
Wyoming - population 586,107 - 3 Electoral votes - 1 Electoral vote per 195,369 pop
California - population 39,144,818 - 55 Electoral votes - 1 Electoral vote per 711,724 pop
With Wyoming as the baseline, California should have 200 Electoral votes to keep the Electoral vote proportional.
Another example
Maine - population 1,392,328 - 4 Electoral votes - 1 Electoral vote per 348,082 pop
Florida - population 20,271,272 - 29 Electoral votes - 1 Electoral vote per 699,009 pop
To be proportional with Maine, Florida should have 61 Electoral votes.
Another example
Kansas - population 2,911,641 - 6 Electoral votes - 1 Electoral vote per 485,274 pop
Illinois - population 12,859,995 - 20 Electoral votes - 1 Electoral vote per 643,000 pop
To be proportional with Kansas, Illinois should hold 26 Electoral votes.
There's nothing proportional about it.
The Electoral College is subversive to a one-person-one-vote democratic election.
If you live in a state like Wyoming your vote for President carries 3.6 times more clout than a California resident's vote does in determining your state's Electoral College vote.
Maine twice as much as Florida.
Kansas 1.33 times more clout than Illinois.
Would you accept an election result for mayor of your city in which the candidate winning the most individual unique votes lost because some people from certain neighborhoods were allowed to vote two or three times? That is close to the effect of the Electoral College.
There's another reason the Electoral College needs to go; another way it subverts a democratic vote.
Red, Blue, and Swing states.
It is disgusting that we have about 95 million eligible voters that didn't bother to vote. About 43%.
Many of them didn't bother because they knew their vote for U.S President would not really count, that because they are red living in a majority blue state or vice versa. How many states, and their issues, are ignored by the candidates in the General Election campaign because they are a 'lock' for blue or red and so their voters concerns are seen as less important?
I want to see real 50-state campaigns, in which every one of our votes are important to the candidates. Take away their ability to ignore certain issues because that state is locked in blue, or red. All of our votes should be sought by the candidates, not just a handful in a few key counties within a few swing states.
If there's anything we can agree on politically in the US, it should be one-person-one-vote and the candidate with the most votes wins.
We now are looking at 2 of the last 3 times the US chose a new President, the candidate that finished 2nd took the White House.
This is a totally effed up way to elect our Presidents.
~~~
Donald J. Trump
Verified account
@realDonaldTrump
The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.
RETWEETS
119,716
10:45 PM - 6 Nov 2012
~~~
y'know what they call the popular vote in other democratic countries?
.
.
.
THE VOTE
EE Patron
