4 ms·

A few large cities ruling the country is tyranny to those that live outside the cities. Only by granting equal state votes can we avoid a small portion of the

A few large cities ruling the country is tyranny to those that live outside the cities. Only by granting equal state votes can we avoid a small portion of the country having an overwhelming amount of say in electing an executive. States are members of the union. You are a member of your state not of the union. Not being a member directly of the union you should not have equal say. If you did have equal say there is no reason to have states. If we dont have states it is time to draft a new constitution cause the old one doesnt apply.

michaelmrose 6y ago
Its not a "few" large cities its most of your fellow citizens. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2017/08/rural-america.html https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2017/08/rural-america... >Urban areas make up only 3 percent of the entire land area of the country but are home to more than 80 percent of the population. Conversely, 97 percent of the country’s land mass is rural but only 19.3 percent of the population lives there. Its not tyranny for a democracy to privilege the voice of 80% over 20% its is the literal definition of the term democracy. It is a matter of courtesy that we debate it here because back in the real world in the corridors of power it is so far from acceptable it will get no hearing now nor ever because it would literally require the 80% to support their own subjugation. You are more likely to see a cure for aging and see the shores of alien worlds with your own eyes than see this come to pass. I understand you may feel that your views are discounted but for you and indeed everyone like you there is 4 people for each one who will not vote to be subordinated to you. Why would they? Given that they don't agree with you why would they vote to implement a scheme by which your will would be placed above them. Sooner ask for the US to be riven in 2 so that people in the "heartland" can opt to go their own way. Its not going to happen either but at least it in theory could absent the contentious challenge of slavery maybe confederacy 2.0 could work.

michaelmrose 6y ago

Its not a "few" large cities its most of your fellow citizens. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2017/08/rural-america.html https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2017/08/rural-america... >Urban areas make up only 3 percent of the entire land area of the country but are home to more than 80 percent of the population. Conversely, 97 percent of the country’s land mass is rural but only 19.3 percent of the population lives there. Its not tyranny for a democracy to privilege the voice of 80% over 20% its is the literal definition of the term democracy. It is a matter of courtesy that we debate it here because back in the real world in the corridors of power it is so far from acceptable it will get no hearing now nor ever because it would literally require the 80% to support their own subjugation. You are more likely to see a cure for aging and see the shores of alien worlds with your own eyes than see this come to pass. I understand you may feel that your views are discounted but for you and indeed everyone like you there is 4 people for each one who will not vote to be subordinated to you. Why would they? Given that they don't agree with you why would they vote to implement a scheme by which your will would be placed above them. Sooner ask for the US to be riven in 2 so that people in the "heartland" can opt to go their own way. Its not going to happen either but at least it in theory could absent the contentious challenge of slavery maybe confederacy 2.0 could work.