3 ms·

You would have an NYC-LosAngeles government nearly every time. Clintons for life. The system was designed to avoid the concentration of power you desire.

by watter 9y ago

sgift 9y ago
Why exactly would this be the case? As far as I can see most people don't live in this two cities? And saying the US system "was designed to avoid the concentration of power" sounds like a sad joke from an European perspective (First-past-post-system, extreme presidential powers etc.)
- caseysoftware 9y ago
  Those "extreme presidential powers" were not in the system design. They were submitted as (sometimes secret) change requests by every president post WW2 and accelerated by presidents in the last ~20 years. Unfortunately, the code review team didn't remove the changes and tacked on their own during the process.
  - sgift 9y ago
    Worst code review team in history. But thanks for the explanation, that makes it a bit more clear.
  - boomboomsubban 9y ago
    >They were submitted as (sometimes secret) change requests by every president post WW2 and accelerated by presidents in the last ~20 years. They started way sooner than that, the first major one was the Louisiana Purchase. Basically non-Washington presidents have been trying to expand their power.
- icebraining 9y ago
  Most people do live in a small number of counties (~146 in ~3000). The US system is essentially designed to distribute voting power over land, rather than per capita.
  - SimbaOnSteroids 9y ago
    It was designed to distribute votes to slave owners in order to appease the southern states. It was never about protecting small states or distributing over land. When the constitution was first signed if votes had been distributed by population the Southern states would have essentially never had a voice, which was a non-starter for them. Considering that these states were also the economic power houses of the US, not including them was also a non-starter. The electoral college coupled with the 3/5ths compromise was the eventual solution to this problem.
    - kfhoeihfy38h 9y ago
      So, if I read your own second paragraph correctly, the system was actually designed to equalize votes between states? Then the 'distribute votes to slave owners' is just an emotional reflex-bating?

You would have an NYC-LosAngeles government nearly every time. Clintons for life. The system was designed to avoid the concentration of power you desire.

by watter 9y ago

You would have an NYC-LosAngeles government nearly every time. Clintons for life. The system was designed to avoid the concentration of power you desire.

sgift 9y ago

Why exactly would this be the case? As far as I can see most people don't live in this two cities? And saying the US system "was designed to avoid the concentration of power" sounds like a sad joke from an European perspective (First-past-post-system, extreme presidential powers etc.)

caseysoftware 9y ago
Those "extreme presidential powers" were not in the system design. They were submitted as (sometimes secret) change requests by every president post WW2 and accelerated by presidents in the last ~20 years. Unfortunately, the code review team didn't remove the changes and tacked on their own during the process.
- sgift 9y ago
  Worst code review team in history. But thanks for the explanation, that makes it a bit more clear.
- boomboomsubban 9y ago
  >They were submitted as (sometimes secret) change requests by every president post WW2 and accelerated by presidents in the last ~20 years. They started way sooner than that, the first major one was the Louisiana Purchase. Basically non-Washington presidents have been trying to expand their power.
icebraining 9y ago
Most people do live in a small number of counties (~146 in ~3000). The US system is essentially designed to distribute voting power over land, rather than per capita.
- SimbaOnSteroids 9y ago
  It was designed to distribute votes to slave owners in order to appease the southern states. It was never about protecting small states or distributing over land. When the constitution was first signed if votes had been distributed by population the Southern states would have essentially never had a voice, which was a non-starter for them. Considering that these states were also the economic power houses of the US, not including them was also a non-starter. The electoral college coupled with the 3/5ths compromise was the eventual solution to this problem.
  - kfhoeihfy38h 9y ago
    So, if I read your own second paragraph correctly, the system was actually designed to equalize votes between states? Then the 'distribute votes to slave owners' is just an emotional reflex-bating?