4 ms·

I get where this comes from, but it’s very obviously wrong. It acts like media is the only group with money and influence. Many, many, many interests depend on

I get where this comes from, but it’s very obviously wrong. It acts like media is the only group with money and influence. Many, many, many interests depend on the voting power that the Electoral College supplies to resource-rich states out west. I’d bet my left arm that the Electoral College will not disappear in my lifetime.

cafard 6y ago
According to something in the papers recently, the idea gained some popularity about 1970, but it was the Southern Democrats who were down on the idea. I am not holding my breath.
Spooky23 6y ago
The beef about the electoral college is similar to the beef about the Senate filibuster -- terrible when it benefits the other guy. Modern marketing for political campaigns will adapt either way. It's pretty easy for campaigns to target demographics, and I'm sure that a GOP candidate could pull the right strings to get a plurality vote. Hispanics, for example, are the weak link in the Democratic tent, as are asians who vote democratic but live in a fairly conservative way.
- war1025 6y ago
  > I'm sure that a GOP candidate could pull the right strings to get a plurality vote There was a bunch of hubub on the Right in the fall about a Democrat win leading to Democrats tilting the tables in all sorts of ways that would lead to a "permanent Democrat majority". I always came back to the same point as you, two-party politics will naturally self-balance at a pretty even split. At a city / state level, you might be able to maintain one-party control through various levels of corruption / influence, but the nation itself is way too fickle to put up with that for long. The weak link in the current majority will always tend to switch sides as soon as it appears that they might gain an advantage by doing so.
  - Spooky23 6y ago
    It’s not all right people, it’s the more reactionary racist types, who inhabit the right wing media outlets.... end of the day, those folks don’t want certain people voting.
darth_avocado 6y ago
^this. Yes while it may be true that media will benefit from this, it almost virtually guarantees no more Republican presidents. Given that the House is also trending in that direction, the only real place where power still remains with the Republicans is the Senate. Too many mega corporations benefit from keeping the Dems out, (taxes, employee rights, minimum wage, etc.) and they will fight tooth and nail to maintain the status quo.
- pmoriarty 6y ago
  "the only real place where power still remains with the Republicans is the Senate" And the Supreme Court, and many lower courts, which have been packed with Republicans. Not to mention the military and the police, and probably the intelligence agencies too.
  - yokaze 6y ago
    Technically, they are judges at court and should rule according to the law not their political leanings. I am aware that is not necessarily true, but it is also in the self-interest of the judges to be perceived as impartial, otherwise they loose their authority. Police, military and intelligence agencies are government agencies, and are part of the executive. They should do their job irregardless of who is in power. A lot of high ranking people have worked through several administrations because they simply do their job, irregardless of their political leanings. Partisanship is harmful for those people, as it threatens their job security.
    - pmoriarty 6y ago
      "Technically, they are judges at court and should rule according to the law not their political leanings." If that were true you wouldn't have liberals appointing liberal judges and conservatives appointing conservatives, and fighting tooth and nail over it. Also, the Supreme Court effectively makes the law, not just follows it, and that's true to some extent of lower courts as well, as most cases never make it to the SC. It's not a coincidence that now that we have a conservative Supreme Court it's widely expected that Roe v Wade is going to get overturned soon. The law didn't change, but who's on the SC did. "They should do their job irregardless of who is in power." They have a lot leeway as to how to do their job, and many of them will use their power to pursue vendettas against people they don't like, as we saw with Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, Bagram, black sites around the world, and all the torture and murder that the police engage in. Prison guards and employees of ICE and Homeland Security are also probably mostly Republicans, and it's hard to argue that their politics and world view doesn't affect the way they do their job or why they are in those jobs in the first place.

cafard 6y ago

According to something in the papers recently, the idea gained some popularity about 1970, but it was the Southern Democrats who were down on the idea. I am not holding my breath.

Spooky23 6y ago

The beef about the electoral college is similar to the beef about the Senate filibuster -- terrible when it benefits the other guy. Modern marketing for political campaigns will adapt either way. It's pretty easy for campaigns to target demographics, and I'm sure that a GOP candidate could pull the right strings to get a plurality vote. Hispanics, for example, are the weak link in the Democratic tent, as are asians who vote democratic but live in a fairly conservative way.

war1025 6y ago
> I'm sure that a GOP candidate could pull the right strings to get a plurality vote There was a bunch of hubub on the Right in the fall about a Democrat win leading to Democrats tilting the tables in all sorts of ways that would lead to a "permanent Democrat majority". I always came back to the same point as you, two-party politics will naturally self-balance at a pretty even split. At a city / state level, you might be able to maintain one-party control through various levels of corruption / influence, but the nation itself is way too fickle to put up with that for long. The weak link in the current majority will always tend to switch sides as soon as it appears that they might gain an advantage by doing so.
- Spooky23 6y ago
  It’s not all right people, it’s the more reactionary racist types, who inhabit the right wing media outlets.... end of the day, those folks don’t want certain people voting.

darth_avocado 6y ago

^this. Yes while it may be true that media will benefit from this, it almost virtually guarantees no more Republican presidents. Given that the House is also trending in that direction, the only real place where power still remains with the Republicans is the Senate. Too many mega corporations benefit from keeping the Dems out, (taxes, employee rights, minimum wage, etc.) and they will fight tooth and nail to maintain the status quo.

pmoriarty 6y ago
"the only real place where power still remains with the Republicans is the Senate" And the Supreme Court, and many lower courts, which have been packed with Republicans. Not to mention the military and the police, and probably the intelligence agencies too.
- yokaze 6y ago
  Technically, they are judges at court and should rule according to the law not their political leanings. I am aware that is not necessarily true, but it is also in the self-interest of the judges to be perceived as impartial, otherwise they loose their authority. Police, military and intelligence agencies are government agencies, and are part of the executive. They should do their job irregardless of who is in power. A lot of high ranking people have worked through several administrations because they simply do their job, irregardless of their political leanings. Partisanship is harmful for those people, as it threatens their job security.
  - pmoriarty 6y ago
    "Technically, they are judges at court and should rule according to the law not their political leanings." If that were true you wouldn't have liberals appointing liberal judges and conservatives appointing conservatives, and fighting tooth and nail over it. Also, the Supreme Court effectively makes the law, not just follows it, and that's true to some extent of lower courts as well, as most cases never make it to the SC. It's not a coincidence that now that we have a conservative Supreme Court it's widely expected that Roe v Wade is going to get overturned soon. The law didn't change, but who's on the SC did. "They should do their job irregardless of who is in power." They have a lot leeway as to how to do their job, and many of them will use their power to pursue vendettas against people they don't like, as we saw with Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, Bagram, black sites around the world, and all the torture and murder that the police engage in. Prison guards and employees of ICE and Homeland Security are also probably mostly Republicans, and it's hard to argue that their politics and world view doesn't affect the way they do their job or why they are in those jobs in the first place.