cross-posted from: https://kbin.social/m/news@lemmy.world/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.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
-5 points
*

Because the will of the people in your definition is the will of a handful of cities and our country is too big for that.

Also it’s the law. It’s literally in the Constitution.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Slabs of stone don’t have will. People have.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Because the will of the people in your definition is the will of a handful of cities

No it’s not. A popular vote is a vote that reflects what the majority want. It has nothing to do with the location of the voter. We should not have the weight of our votes be effected by where we live, like we currently have with the electoral college. My vote should count the same way as anybody else’s, and so should yours.

Ideally the presidency and all other offices would be handled with STAR or approval voting, as they do not produce spoiler effects, weights by voter location, and help reduce extremist candidates.

It’s literally in the Constitution.

And it needs to change because the current system is fundamentally flawed. Our current system weights a voter’s voice by where they live, ignores huge swaths of people, has a spoiler effect, and does nothing to stop extremist candidates.

People in swing states should not get the only say.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

Swing states don’t get the only say, a vote in an uncontested or lopsided race is still counted. All you are complaining about is you want your state to feel special on election night.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Swing states don’t get the only say

They effectively do.

a vote in an uncontested or lopsided race is still counted.

But they are effectively meaningless because California will always vote blue and Texas will always vote red. If you try to vote against your state’s pre-selected candidate your vote basically just gets tossed.

Actually it’s worse, since your population contribution actually ends up going towards electors that vote against what you voted for.

All you are complaining about is you want your state to feel special on election night.

No, I want all votes to be counted equally. I live in a swing state, and unless you live in a tighter swing state, my vote means more than yours ever will. That’s bullshit, and a fundamentally bad design.

My state shouldn’t be special. That’s the whole point of getting rid of the electoral college, to ensure all votes are counted equally regardless of origin of state.

permalink
report
parent
reply

conservative

!conservative@lemmy.world

Create post

A community to discuss conservative politics and views.

Rules:

  1. No racism or bigotry.

  2. Be civil: disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally insult others.

  3. No spam posting.

  4. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  5. Shitposts and memes are allowed until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.

  6. No trolling.

Community stats

  • 512

    Monthly active users

  • 185

    Posts

  • 2.5K

    Comments