Globally, Broad Support for Representative and Direct Democracy

[*michaelsean*]

(10-17-2017, 03:16 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I'm representing these ideas as changes in a new constitution, playing off a thread Matt made a few weeks ago. The idea being that concept is antiquated. 



This is a bit of anachronism. The system was designed so that states could pick a way to assign electors or educated people to go to Congress and vote for the President. The idea of a popular vote for candidates isn't uniformly established for decades. Same with the allocation of electors within the state. 

The analogy also ignores the fact that with California's larger size and population comes greater diversity in demographics and needs. The issue is still rooted in your wanting to place importance in the idea of a state as a whole. Putting less importance on the idea of California as a state provides for more voices in California to be heard and their unique needs addressed, like the 1 in every 14 Trump voters who live in California.




Again, this is a hypothetical change and I'm only suggesting these changes occur within the Senate and in the Presidential election. It won't affect the representation of regions in addressing their needs, it just takes away the uneven voice given to small population states smaller than large cities. 





If anything there will be less extremism. The 4.5 million Trump voters in California would have their voices heard in both the Presidential election and the senatorial elections. You'll likely see more moderate candidates. 


I know. The issue isn't allocation, it's the fact that we use electoral votes. Why should a voter in Wyoming count the same as 3.5 voters in California?

'Cause California is full of a bunch of freaks.