Tilly
Platinum Member
The UK system is certainly no better when MPs are elected on as little as 24% of the vote and where nearly 4 million votes gets you only 1 seat.I appreciate the point you are making but the end of it is that the person who had most votes lost.It's another form of Democracy and contrary to popular belief we're not a democracy per se, we are a constitutional democratic republic exercised directly and indirectly through elected representatives making us a combination of a democracy and a republic. Our founding fathers were aware of both monarchies and pure democratic forms of government (ancient Greece), the evils inherent in both and this is what they came up with. So far it's worked quite well even with it's warts and occasional failings. No system of government survives the theoretic perfection when the practical is applied, people are involved........Annoying when that democracy thing doesnt work out for you. As it stands the majority have been disenfranchised by the minority. Its a bizarre way of doing things.Majority rule (pure democracy) disenfranchises multiple peoples, the most populous states would always control the election results and could (probably would) control all aspects of the federal government dictating to the less populous states. Not really all that fair, the Electoral College balances it out some, not perfect but better than the alternative.Thanks for that. Where is the problem then ? Why doesnt the outcome reflect what the people actually want ?Obviously the person you were talking to is an astute student of history......... NOT!!!!!!
Electoral College - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com
Some Americans are seemingly more equal than others under this system.