View Single Post
Old October 27 2012, 01:53 AM   #34
Gaith
Rear Admiral
 
Gaith's Avatar
 
Location: Washington, DC
Re: Electoral College; Yes or No?

gturner wrote: View Post
So you'd also argue that we should abolish the US Senate and have the UN vote by population, so India and China will make all the decisions for the rest of the world?
Certainly, I'd abolish the Senate. The UN, I'm not sure; I'd have to look into it more deeply, but to say that the General Assembly "makes all the world's decisions" is, uh, not remotely close to true.

I'll throw the question back to you, though: was the aforementioned Supreme Court decision wrong? Should a backwoods New York state voter be counted more heavily than a Bronxer?



Pavonis wrote: View Post
Let's say the Electoral College is abolished, and the US Presidency is elected by popular vote. Where do the candidates go for votes?
Short answer: everywhere.

Longer answer: we've got these things called a media and an Internet. You don't need to physically see and hear a candidate speak to form an reasoned opinion. (I've got one, and I've never seen a current major-party candidate in my home state.) If every American's vote was counted equally, neighbors would get involved with canvassing neighbors across the country, not just in the swing states. And this'd be reflected in polls, and candidates would be influenced by those polls. Since South Dakota is a safe red state, a popular vote would increase your individual votes' importance.



Pavonis wrote: View Post
South Dakota is fly-over country, not worth stopping in because any one suburb of those largest cities will be larger than any of the villages of South Dakota.
Word to the wise: a candidate appearing in a large city like LA or NYC doesn't mean that he necessarily sees any more people than he would in South Dakota. City visits come with their own challenges, namely space, security, and crowding logistics. Look at the places candidates visit in actual contested states - most of those areas are suburbs.



Pavonis wrote: View Post
Still, without the Electoral College representing us, what kind of attention would we get?
Uh, maybe two Senators, the same as California and Texas, and infinitely more than DC?! Live in one of those states/DC for a while, then cry me a river!

As I said above, small-population states boss the large-population ones around perpetually, even though the latter group holds the vast majority of Americans, and produces the vast majority of the country's wealth.


Pavonis wrote: View Post
South Dakota is neither, but we're still in a better position than we would be without the Electoral College.
You are, but mainly because, as I said above, the layout of states gives Electoral College bias in favor of the right-wing politics South Dakota holds so dear. Vermont, on the other hand, as a safe far-left state, gets utterly and totally screwed over by the system.



Pavonis wrote: View Post
OK, maybe I'm not organizing and expressing my thoughts well.
You're expressing yourself just fine. You think that you deserve more votes than other citizens do, merely because you live on one side of an imaginary line within the United States. You think unequal votes are fair.
Gaith is offline   Reply With Quote