(November 10, 2016 at 9:55 am)mh.brewer Wrote:

(November 10, 2016 at 9:32 am)Tiberius Wrote: Why do you like it? People in smaller states get more voting power. That's inherently unfair.

Not smaller states, states with smaller populations. Take it away and you've just made another minority even greater than the minority than we already are. We might as well not exist in the federal arena. 

Then the Senate is unfair also. Why should tiny NE get the same two votes that CA gets? NE's population is so small that they shouldn't count.

You are absolutely right about the senate.

Last night Stephen Colbert said:

"Now when your child asks you, 'why do bad things happen to good people' you can look him in the eye and say, 'the electoral college.'

I don't get over the fact that a candidate winning the popular vote is actually losing. That doesn't sound like democracy anymore since the people definetely decided differently.

That's not the winner takes it all but the loser.

Other democracies have different problems, but this is simply absurd.

(November 10, 2016 at 11:46 am)Minimalist Wrote:

(November 10, 2016 at 9:55 am)mh.brewer Wrote: Not smaller states, states with smaller populations. Take it away and you've just made another minority even greater than the minority than we already are. We might as well not exist in the federal arena. 

Then the Senate is unfair also. Why should tiny NE get the same two votes that CA gets? NE's population is so small that they shouldn't count.

You are absolutely right about the senate.

OK, do you mean that the senate count of 2/state should be changed?

That's because you don't understand the rationale behind the constitution, Abs.  It was not meant to enshrine democracy.

(November 10, 2016 at 12:00 pm)mh.brewer Wrote:

(November 10, 2016 at 11:46 am)Minimalist Wrote: You are absolutely right about the senate.

OK, do you mean that the senate count of 2/state should be changed?

Two per state. 

Wyoming pop = 584,000 = 2 senators

California pop = 39 million = 2 senators

It's fucking asinine.

(November 10, 2016 at 9:55 am)mh.brewer Wrote:

(November 10, 2016 at 9:32 am)Tiberius Wrote: Why do you like it? People in smaller states get more voting power. That's inherently unfair.

Not smaller states, states with smaller populations. Take it away and you've just made another minority even greater than the minority than we already are. We might as well not exist in the federal arena. 

Then the Senate is unfair also. Why should tiny NE get the same two votes that CA gets? NE's population is so small that they shouldn't count.

Yeah sorry, when I said "smaller states" I meant population wise. Why should states with smaller populations get more voting power though? You are voting for a President of the entire US, so why should a person from Vermont have more say than a person from California?

The Senate might seem unfair, but is it really? The point of the split in the Senate is so every "state" as a single entity gets an equal vote. All bills must also make it through the House, which is split proportionally.

So a bill must first get passed by the House, which is fairly representative of the population. If that passes, the Senate votes, but the Senate's job is to effectively answer the question: do a majority of states in the union approve the bill?

Think of the House as the population voting on a bill, and the Senate as the states voting on it.

(November 10, 2016 at 12:06 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

(November 10, 2016 at 12:00 pm)mh.brewer Wrote: OK, do you mean that the senate count of 2/state should be changed?

Two per state. 

Wyoming pop = 584,000 = 2 senators

California pop = 39 million = 2 senators

It's fucking asinine.

I disagree. I think Senate/House is a pretty nifty compromise to offer equal representation.

EC stems from the "Great Compromise" don't it ??

Wouldn't have a country without that.


If Trump had won popular vote but lost EC, would there be any wailing, sack cloth and ashes, gnashing of teeth ?

Fair is fair, after all. Be careful what you wish for.

(November 10, 2016 at 9:32 am)Tiberius Wrote:

(November 10, 2016 at 9:30 am)mh.brewer Wrote: Nope. I like it. Just change it away from winner takes all.

Why do you like it? People in smaller states get more voting power. That's inherently unfair.

The USA is not a democracy; it is a constitutional republic of sovereign states i.e. the United States of America.