4 ms·
Except the president clearly doesn't represent the will of the people, as evidenced by his loss in the popular vote. So how is this at all justifiable?
by lurr 9y ago
Except the president clearly doesn't represent the will of the people, as evidenced by his loss in the popular vote.
So how is this at all justifiable?
- PhasmaFelis 9y agoI thought we were talking about Congress, not the President.
- jdmichal 9y agoThe president also doesn't write laws. So there's no impact on representation regarding laws and taxation.
- adventured 9y agoBecause the US is not a strict Democracy, it's a Constitutional Republic that uses an electoral college as a layer of separation. Further, even if Trump had won the popular vote, your floated premise would remain: the popular vote only represented a modest minority fraction of all adults in the US. So how can that possibly represent the actual full will of The People? Regardless, history has proven on countless occasions that the will of the people is not always the ideal thing to follow. The Bill of Rights exists precisely to protect the minority from the all-too-often irrational will of the people. (you'll note that I specifically didn't justify the current state of affairs in US politics as being somehow good or positive, I'll pre-empt that conflation)