Because we are not a democracy -- a terrible idea for the United States -- especially as more and more illegals are brought into the pool and the inevitable culture shift. I trust the Founding Father's approach, which gave the small guy a voice amongst the entire population as compared to mob rule -- which is exactly what would happen.
The small guy? You mean in terms of numbers? Of course you would trust a small number of ruling elites to guide the masses.
I trust the representative model where Wyoming or Montana would have no voice because zillions of people in California and New York trump their vote. Additionally, a democracy produces stupid outcomes when the constituency knows more about sports and pop culture than the supposed desired outcome.
The States voices are heard through Congress. That's where States get to send Senators and Representatives. Explain to me why someone's vote in Montana can't just be counted as equal to someone's on California.
Because California has 39 million people and only 1.1 million people in Montana -- it's a proportionate model, which makes sense. Otherwise, it doesn't matter if every voter in California wants candidate X—a scenario where the votes of one state would trump those of 20+ states with drastically different views and outcomes. This would naturally be a problem if the outcome opposed the common liberal agenda -- like requiring firearms, federal abolition of abortion, etc.
What does it matter that 39 million people live in California as opposed to 1.1 million in Montana? I don't care what States the votes come from, shouldn't the person who wins the most votes win the election? It seems like your basic concern is that your policies are supported by fewer actual people.
No, it's much broader than that. I would be concerned with mob mentality, populism, voter apathy and polarization, corruption and special interest groups, media manipulation and corruption, and others that can easily influence a true democratic vote. Not to mention the invasion of illegals, who will eventually be voters, which would play a significant role.
You're not concerned with special interest groups? In your context Montana is a special interest group you want to give extra voting power to and the mob are simply voters who outnumber you and who you disagree with.
Not really .. mob rule prevents states like New York, Illinois, and California from selecting elected officials with their agenda of stupidity and low-information voters. Every voter in one of those states could vote for a single candidate, and they only get a sliver of the pie for the presidential election -- the way it should be.
If smaller states aren't a special interest group then why do we need an electoral college? Why not just count up all the votes and see who got the most?
And that's why your nation is a mere shadow of what it once was.
Because we aren't a democracy, and the founding fathers were much smarter than you.
Heard he uses the same hairstylist as Dennis Rodman and Donald Trump.
No they weren't.
They were ignorant bigot slavers who didn't think black people, women and non land owning whites should vote.
In school we pledged allegiance to the Republic for which the flag stands. I see now you had bad teachers.
Yep. That's a rational argument.
You guys seem to be roaring along, lol
Because so few have an allegiance to their country. Thanks for making my point
