Trump's friends showed us how easy it is to meddle with the electoral college. Still, nobody talks about abolishing it, at least not seriously, even though it's the most logical way to protect "one person, one vote." In 2016, I was living in Egypt (where there are no electors for expats and our votes are set aside to be used as tie-break…
Trump's friends showed us how easy it is to meddle with the electoral college. Still, nobody talks about abolishing it, at least not seriously, even though it's the most logical way to protect "one person, one vote." In 2016, I was living in Egypt (where there are no electors for expats and our votes are set aside to be used as tie-breakers should they be necessary, where we saw the worst president in US history get elected by a small group of people who thought they knew better than the voters. Instead of the electoral college protecting us from bad choices, they cursed us with a deranged clown in orange makeup and a floppy suit.
One possible solution is to eliminate the "winner take all" systems and make it proportional to the votes received. the Founding Fathers never could have conceived that one state (California) could have a population equal to sixteen other states. This holds true for the Senate as well. It may be that there is no other solution than dissolution of the government. This would send shock waves around the world since a powerful U.S. government is the principal guarantee for democracies in many of the world's countries.
The government as it was set up in the late 1700s just cannot work efficiently anymore. There are too many people, too many states, and we've just begun to exploit the many weak spots the Founding Fathers never thought of. In our history 5 times a president won the electoral vote while losing the popular vote. This should be unacceptable, but of course it wasn't. Basically they invented this method because they couldn't think of anything else.
And representation in a democracy should be population-based, but states each have 2 senators regardless of how many people live there. Nobody else on earth has such a "democracy."
I agree 100%, representation should be one person, one vote, majority rule. And, given that the country is as much divided now between the forces of democracy, on the one hand, and authoritarian despotic rule, on the other hand, just not purely geographically, makes the prospect for holding it together going forward look bleak. The modern Confederacy (MAGA/KKK Republicans) will ultimately destroy the Union so that they can have their white Protestant autocracy.
Trump's friends showed us how easy it is to meddle with the electoral college. Still, nobody talks about abolishing it, at least not seriously, even though it's the most logical way to protect "one person, one vote." In 2016, I was living in Egypt (where there are no electors for expats and our votes are set aside to be used as tie-breakers should they be necessary, where we saw the worst president in US history get elected by a small group of people who thought they knew better than the voters. Instead of the electoral college protecting us from bad choices, they cursed us with a deranged clown in orange makeup and a floppy suit.
One possible solution is to eliminate the "winner take all" systems and make it proportional to the votes received. the Founding Fathers never could have conceived that one state (California) could have a population equal to sixteen other states. This holds true for the Senate as well. It may be that there is no other solution than dissolution of the government. This would send shock waves around the world since a powerful U.S. government is the principal guarantee for democracies in many of the world's countries.
The government as it was set up in the late 1700s just cannot work efficiently anymore. There are too many people, too many states, and we've just begun to exploit the many weak spots the Founding Fathers never thought of. In our history 5 times a president won the electoral vote while losing the popular vote. This should be unacceptable, but of course it wasn't. Basically they invented this method because they couldn't think of anything else.
And representation in a democracy should be population-based, but states each have 2 senators regardless of how many people live there. Nobody else on earth has such a "democracy."
I agree 100%, representation should be one person, one vote, majority rule. And, given that the country is as much divided now between the forces of democracy, on the one hand, and authoritarian despotic rule, on the other hand, just not purely geographically, makes the prospect for holding it together going forward look bleak. The modern Confederacy (MAGA/KKK Republicans) will ultimately destroy the Union so that they can have their white Protestant autocracy.