34 ms·
It comes down to the question of whether we are a nation of a single people or a nation of autonomous states. We cannot be a nation of a single people due to t
by tastyfreeze 6y ago
It comes down to the question of whether we are a nation of a single people or a nation of autonomous states. We cannot be a nation of a single people due to the diversity of people spread across an immense chunk of land. What is important to me in Alaska is only tangentially related to what is important in NYC. A popular vote is a path to disbanding states and removes an important protection by the states against a tyrannical national government. By maintaining states we allow issues of state importance to only be important in that state instead of requiring the whole nation be subject.
- croon 6y agoThat's a very limited/specific scope. What you are also saying is that you are ignoring up to half of the people of Alaska as the elections are winner-takes-all. If instead it was one person one vote, and representational per state, everyone would have a say. Everyone in Alaska with your views would be heard, as well as everyone in NYC with your views. What you are calling "tyrannical national government" would be majority rule (ie what more people wants, as opposed to now), and is just as true on a state level, just on another scale. Also how the presidential election is structured isn't actually related to the question of federal control. Federal control over state control has been a hot topic in the last 4 years either way.