Lets get rid of primary elections when electing our president

[Clueless Morgan]

Let's not forget that Pennsylvania was in the news recently because of gerrymandering. Given that PA is a swing state, the gerrymandering issue is a big one and yet one more reason why the EC has to go. It made my vote in my county basically pointless.

And not only is gerrymandering an issue, lawmakers are on record admitting they're doing it to gain a political advantage.

Justice Kagan wrote of partisan gerrymandering it has “become ever more extreme and durable, insulating officeholders against all but the most titanic shifts in the political tides... The 2010 redistricting cycle produced some of the worst partisan gerrymanders on record. The technology [of map-drawing software] will only get better, so the 2020 cycle will only get worse.”

But this is a little beside the point because presidential elections, the only ones decided by the electoral college, aren't voted on according to congressional districts. So even if North Carolina, which was terribly gerrymandered to favor Republicans, voted 60% D and 40% R, the state would go blue for the electoral college even though 10 of its 13 districts are gerrymandered to go Republican.

Gerrymandering influences the House of Representatives not the presidential vote.

It's still fucking awful though.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.  I obviously disagree, and the problem you described with the view of your mother, seems to be more concerned with a simple majority system, than an electoral college.   The issue is, that you would have that same problem, but on a country wide level.  I see the EC as a compromise.  I don't think that you would see a EC issue, if there was a 10 point or larger gap, and likely much smaller as we've had recently.

If there was a 10 point or larger gap in polling? What are you referring to?

In any case, I think we may have a fundamentally different view of what the office of the president is meant to reflect. To me, the president is not only the face we give to the world and not only the commander in chief, but is also the thought-leader of the country, the one meant to represent The People as whole as opposed to senators who reflect their states, or congresspeople who represent their districts (or at least should be representative of their districts).

Don't forget, either, that we have a whole other branch of the government that is meant to represent people all over the country at a more granular scale. The president isn't the sole advocate of the people.

If the majority of the country is moving toward LGBT equality then we should have a president that will fight to take us there. If the majority wants a blanket ban on abortion access then the president should push for that. If the people agree that climate change is a major issue facing us in the future, we should have a president who will work toward ways to combat it. Instead, what we've been getting with the electoral college system twice in the last five elections, is a president that the majority of the people didn't vote for who hold views the majority of people don't share, and in the case of our current president, is only interested in doing things to please the most extreme subsection of his own party.

Every other office that we elect is elected by popular vote. Why not the office that represents The People?