3 ms·
That's just another way of saying that an individual in a smaller state is more important than an individual in a large city. The Senate and the electoral colle
by LeifCarrotson 4y ago
That's just another way of saying that an individual in a smaller state is more important than an individual in a large city. The Senate and the electoral college are the modern 3/5ths compromise. Every human in the country ought to have the same ability to influence the outcome of elections, regardless of how much land they own.
- RhysU 4y agoYes. And any city dweller can move to the county or vice versa. The rules of the game are well-known, hence fair.
- LordKeren 4y agoThis is fundamentally wrong because states don’t break votes into urban, suburban, and country voters. It’s winner takes all for the state. There are a huge amount of people who’s vote for president does not matter at all due to the voting trends of their state. These people’s only option is to move to a swing state. This is a nonsense solution to an obviously flawed system of voting that can be fixed incredibly easily
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago> another way of saying that an individual in a smaller state is more important than an individual in a large city An individual in the country is more able to rebel than an individual in the country. Territorial integrity was the original motivation for the system. It still has arguments for it, though the massive shift in relative economic productivity makes the college, in my opinion, obsolete.