leashyourkids wrote:
The Electoral College exists for the same reason that every other "representative" portion of our government exists... the founders did not trust common rubes to make important decisions, such as electing a president.
exactly! i'm with you on this one for sure, because when i talk about the reasons i don't vote one of them is that because i live in chicago/land, no matter who i decided to vote for my vote wouldn't have mattered. hilldog = you add 1 more vote on top of the margin she already won the popular vote by. trump = since hillary won illinois and got the electoral votes from it en route to the popular vote, it honestly didn't matter if trump got another vote from me seeing as in the end the popular vote technically doesn't matter.
now if you wanna say that the theory behind the electoral college is to make sure that people in buttfuck, montana don't effectively have their "voice" erased by the glut of people in all of the big cities in america, welp, i technically can understand why you'd wanna think this way. to a certain extent i can understand the concept that america is just more than like 25 big cities and a bunch of suburbs/metropolitan-areas, and therefore people who live in far-out rural areas would effectively be silenced/neutralized by virtue of the fact that there's far less people "like them" compared to sub/urban people who live in areas with much much higher population density.
THAT SAID
on the other hand why do people in buttfuck montana get to have votes that are effectively more valuable than mine? yes, even tho montana has less electoral votes than illinois does, at the same time there's still SOME concept of "everyone HAS to have their voice heard" which basically means that people in the boonies have votes that carry more weight by virtue that there's less of them than there are people voting [blue] in NYC/LA/Chi/etc. in that sense it's like i'm being penalized for living in an area where people want to live, because after a certain point it's like "yeah, we get the idea chicago! ok we'll just give your area/state to hilldog and move on"
if "every man [was] created equal" and the people TRULY decided who the next president was, then at the end of the day the popular vote has to be the be-all/end-all for electing presidents. there's just no way around it.... you take the whole damn country, add up all the votes, and whoever has the most wins. it's beyond simple and "common sense" to me, so to have anything but the popular vote determining who wins you basically end up with what leash said: "the system was designed to make sure that "the great unwashed" didn't (accidentally) elect someone who wasn't "supposed to be" president.
so yeah, hey, what can i say? i totally agree with leash on something for once in my....
leashyourkids wrote:
(we now know they were right).
dadgummit! go figure that a guy whose nickname implies that
your children are feral beasts who should be leashed at all time to prevent those [lesser beings] from bothering him tends to think that people en masse shouldn't be allowed to choose who
his president is! #NotMyPresident #PedanticLeft #LeashKnowsBest #ThatWillLearnYa
(honestly, outside of the "bit" here, i technically don't think that leash is entirely wrong.... it's just that when i say that "there's no way that the average shmoes who constantly get in my way at jewel are going to be allowed to make any decisions that
matter, i do it in such a way that doesn't imply that i transcend all of said schmoes.... when you talk about "the great unwashed" and all that it's like "do you really think i went out of my way to take a shower today?" =P)
_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
Les Grobstein's huge hog is proof that God has a sense of humor, isn't it?