cross-posted from: https://kbin.social/m/news@lemmy.world/t/488620

65% of U.S. adults say the way the president is elected should be changed so that the winner of the popular vote nationwide wins the presidency.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
-21 points

It was designed to be unequal on purpose. The electoral is what keeps us from being ruled by the masses. It should not change.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

So instead we get minority rule. Soooooo much better when the small number of loonies get to derail a functional government with a temper tantrum that ‘the masses’ want.

It’s a badly designed system, and claiming it’s like this on purpose doesn’t negate how bad the system is. Also, we should not be chained to ideas that came around 250 years ago when other people have improved on the idea and made it less shitty.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-19 points
*

Not at all. We are ruled by the states.

The system is fine. It allows all states to have some say in the process.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points
*

Who gives a fuck about the states’ vote? States are just containers for people, and an excuse that the minority loves to use to explain how they get to rule over majority.

The electoral college is an undemocratic and broken system that makes my vote in a small state worth more than your vote in a bigger state.

A vote is a vote, and only losers need to remove the vote from the masses to be able to win. It’s literally the only reason there’s been a Republican president since H.W., and it’s no surprise they’re desperate to keep around the undemocratic voting method that allows them to steal elections they didn’t win.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

We are ruled by the states.

Lines on map can’t rule. Only people can.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

It was designed to be unequal on purpose

What a convincing argument of its continued existence.

The electoral is what keeps us from being ruled by the masses.

It doesn’t do that, all it does is give people in swing states a bigger voice than anybody else, which is a terrible thing for our country.

Everybody should have a voice, instead it’s just a handful of people in a small set of states.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-16 points

Doesn’t sound like you’re a conservative or believe in a republic.

A popular vote would mean the costal areas would have the largest vote and rural areas would get ignored.

It would quickly lead to a breakup up of the union.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Doesn’t sound like you’re a conservative

I’m not.

or believe in a republic.

I do. But ours is in need of reform to make it a better republic that more accurately reflects the will of the people.

A popular vote would mean the costal areas would have the largest vote and rural areas would get ignored.

That’s already what happens under the electoral college.

And every single other electected position in government goes by what is essentially a popular vote, if this was such a problem, all other positions would also be electoral college.

It would quickly lead to a breakup up of the union.

The U.S. is the only country that uses an electoral college. All other countries that exist, and are democratic republics use a popular vote and they’re just fine.

If a popular vote for presidency would cause the destruction of this country, why hasn’t popular vote for all other positions done so already? It’s because this is just fearmongering based on zero evidence. Actually it’s worse, because there is plenty of evidence it wouldn’t do this because of the aforementioned other countries that use popular vote.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

We have the senate, which is needed to pass any law and gives equal representation to the states. We have the supreme court, which can strike down any law as unconstitutional. We have plenty of checks on mob rule without disenfranchising a gigantic swath of voters.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Then why don’t we institute the “” It’s not “rule by the masses” but much more representative of what the population wants.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points

Or why don’t we just keep the system that works and has kept the country running. Why change something when it works as designed ?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Why change something when it works as designed ?

This argument could unironically have been used to support the continued use of gas chambers in Nazi Germany.

Just because something is “working” as designed doesn’t mean we should keep using it. If the design is terrible then it needs replaced.

permalink
report
parent
reply

conservative

!conservative@lemmy.world

Create post

A community to discuss conservative politics and views.

Rules:

  1. No racism or bigotry.

  2. Be civil: disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally insult others.

  3. No spam posting.

  4. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  5. Shitposts and memes are allowed until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.

  6. No trolling.

Community stats

  • 1K

    Monthly active users

  • 191

    Posts

  • 1.9K

    Comments