Quote:
Originally Posted by butterfly
Because that isn't federalism. There are no "united states" (lower case intended) when they don't even exist. What would be the purpose of states, then? To have different license plates? It is the states that gave birth to the national government, not the other way around. The national government exists at the behest of the people and the states. We aren't amending the constitution to abolish the electoral college because we don't want to, so the states won't ratify it. Who would vote to diminish their voice in Washington DC?
And for the ends-justify-the-means crowd, be careful what you wish for. California, Texas, Florida, New York, and Ohio are the top five states in population per electoral vote.
What's next, adding up the total goals scored and allowed over the regular season and award the team who wins that the Stanley Cup? Then every goal matters equally.
|
Right, because that's totally the same as a majority rules system of election. A perfect analogy if ever I've seen one.
Here's the trade off for a pure popular vote election of president: The Senate. States are still well represented in the senate in a disproportionate manner to the population. Wyoming and North Dakota get 2 senators each. California and Florida gets 2 senators each. There's your balance of power.
There's zero reason to keep the electoral college. It's a holdover from a bygone era and flat out anti-democratic.