3 ms·
> Anything else is not a pure democracy. Why do you assume pure democracy is desirable? Do you also prefer every law to be voted on by the entire population (
by zeveb 10y ago
> Anything else is not a pure democracy.
Why do you assume pure democracy is desirable? Do you also prefer every law to be voted on by the entire population (it's a valid point of view, albeit one I disagree with)?
The whole point of a republic is to temper the will of the mob. Our electoral college — which represents the fact that the United States are a federal republic — forces candidates to campaign across the states, and the spend the most time in precisely those states which are most evenly-split (the swing states, which is another way of saying the political centre).
Eliminating the Electoral College — as, sadly, many wish to do — would do irreparable harm to the United States, perhaps even more severe than popular election of senators.
- unabst 10y agoSorry, I'm only talking about pure voting, not "pure democracy" as in everyone votes for everything. Your support for the electoral college is still support for all votes not being equal at the voter level. My claim is that there is nothing more important than the voices being equal if we are to claim we are a unity of equal people. Any system on top of that is a filter, and is tampering with what is most important. Why must entire States be colored red or blue. That's a filter, and an act of muddling. We're dividing States when what we need to be is United. Even if we elected by popular vote, candidates will still have to campaign and they will still have to go somewhere. Their strategy can be State based, and certainly their choices may differ without this "system" but even with the system in place they are choosing specific States over others. I don't see how these specific States deserve more attention than those that are completely ignored. For there still are States completely ignored with the Electoral College.