10-17-2017, 07:36 PM
(10-17-2017, 01:00 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Getting rid of the electoral college would be the very thing that let regional trends dictate for the whole. It would promote creating highly populated political echo-chambers
100% correct. While I don't fully understand why larger cities/urban areas lean more liberal (although more diversity is as good a bet as any), many are undoubtedly influenced by the people and groups around them.
And those interests are best addressed in local and state govt. The problem is people want the federal govt to impose their values on everyone else (and that applies to both liberals and conservatives).
People's problems are not with representation, or lack thereof, in federal govt. It's with federal overreach and the subjugation of your state and local govt. I don't think people really believe SF should be telling people of Akron how to "live". I don't think people outside of major metro areas want to be ignored because their vote can't make a difference.
The concept of "one person, one vote" ignores the herd mentality...and a "minority" being overrun by the herd is precisely why the system was designed as it was. Ignoring gerrymandering, the House is proportionate representation. The Senate gives each state an equal voice. And the POTUS is a combination of the two. I happen to think that strikes a very good balance.
--------------------------------------------------------
