Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducay
I love how people are magically up in arms about the Electoral college all of the sudden ; that system sucks, sure, but why is no one complaining about the senate which is about 1000000000x more inequally weighted (2 senators regardless of population). So you think California is getting the shaft on the college? They're about 50x more shafted in the Senate, which, arguably is much more impactful than the presidency.
But at the end of the day, as mentioned, the senate and college are set up this way because that is how they were constitutionally when the danged union was formed. Its like complaining about OTL vs. SOL vs. 3 points for win in the NHL; sure, you can talk about how your team would have won under different rules, but these are the rules we play by and your hypothetical doesn't matter. If you don't like it, get an amendment passed. Until then, these be rules of the duel.
**Flames would have won Pacific in 2015 if we give 3 points for wins on Tuesdays, 2 points for shootout wins, but only a half point for OTL if they occur before 11pm
|
Well when the union was formed, the framers of the constitution also thought it was okay to own other human beings. So we should just let the decisions of men from 200+ years ago to make our decisions now, right?
It's the same BS as the Second Amendment argument. The founding fathers had no idea what kind of weaponry would exist in the future, nor what the political climate of the country would be. The world and this country were vastly different places back then, and we need to change things as times change.
I'd be more than happy to also alter the 2 senators/state thing, they're both outdated and unfairly benefit the interior states where a minority of the population lives.