04-04-2019, 01:58 PM
(04-04-2019, 12:48 AM)hollodero Wrote: The EC doesn't effective make the states "equal despite population differences" though anyway. Because I feel that would have to mean every state gets the same amount of electors. Since that isn't the case, the principle doesn't seem to stand anyway?
Equal in terms of the number of EC votes, no. Equal in that they all have an "individual" say, yes.
Quote:I don't feel I'm doing that - I sure would - but I don't think going with the popular vote for POTUS elections dismantles the entire system of governance. I don't see the compelling coherence there at all.
Now getting rid of the two senators per state, which I absolutely would deem more fair, possibly would do so. But I'm not arguing that, nor do I see it as a logical consequence of popular vote vs. EC for POTUS votes.
I've already explained why, I suppose you just don't buy my argument, which is, of course, fine.
Quote:And I'd still say the say of the people should count more in a federal POTUS election. Congress, OK that's different, I get that. Representatives from each state get voted for in the states, then get together in Washington and negotiate stuff. And smaller states are overrepresented, but I'm not suggesting changing that. But POTUS, as I see it, should be for all Americans and so every American vote should count equally in my understanding of a fair nationwide election (always putting aside how some Americans have no vote at all, which is still absurd). I get the points against it somehow, I'm just not convinced.
Again, fair enough. I'm much more on the side of Benjamin Franklin on this kind of issue. His quote, "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner", is a salient one in this debate.
