> Very contradictory, and some would say elitist. No, not elitist. It recognizes that the will of the people must be done, but... not so fast. The problem is

> Very contradictory, and some would say elitist. No, not elitist. It recognizes that the will of the people must be done, but... not so fast. The problem is the will of the people can be really immoral and can cause rampant chaos and riots. Beheadings, storming the castle, all that. The whole idea is for the electoral college to dampen the swings. Stability benefits all. Sure, change. Progress. But deliberate change. Slow change. Take one example: Gay rights. Clinton the 1st passed "don't ask, don't tell" in .. what? 1993? And then we let the whole issue simmer for a generation. Because that's what it takes. It takes old people dying off, for the population to come around to a better way of running things. (Dying off without being murdered)