4 ms·

> The problem is that it's FPTP on a per-state level This is the United States (plural). It was designed as a coalition of largely independent states, and tha

> The problem is that it's FPTP on a per-state level This is the United States (plural). It was designed as a coalition of largely independent states, and that is never going to change other than at gunpoint. I don't believe that Germany allows (say) Russians to vote, does it? Heck, not even Italians get to vote in German elections, and they're at least in theory in the same European Union.

eqvinox 2y ago
> This is the United States (plural). It was designed as a coalition of largely independent states, What does that have to do with anything? The U.S. president is the president of all people of the U.S. — applying per-state FPTP plainly distorts the vote. It doesn't have anything to do with state sovereignty or independence, it's simply a very poor voting system. Or are you saying the states should elect the president? I'm quite sure the U.S. general public won't agree with you on that. > and that is never going to change other than at gunpoint. The addition of this half-sentence reads as incredibly odd. Are you expecting someone to show up and hold the U.S. at gunpoint? > Heck, not even Italians get to vote in German elections, Italians do in fact get to vote in German municipal and EU elections if they have a permanent residence there. Same for any other EU citizen residing in any other EU country. Only for country level elections you vote in your country of citizenship rather than residence.
- Turing_Machine 2y ago
  > > and that is never going to change other than at gunpoint. > The addition of this half-sentence reads as incredibly odd. There are millions of Americans who have taken oaths to defend the Constitution of the United States (Not "the government". Not whoever currently happens to be President. Not some "monarch". The Constitution) against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Virtually all of people these have military experience (it's part of the standard military oath, also in the oaths of office for many government officials). Attempting to forcibly change the Constitution outside the normal amendment process would almost certainly result in large-scale bloodshed, and changing it through the normal amendment process is never going to work, because the smaller states are never going to sign off on it. Those are the facts on the ground.

eqvinox 2y ago

> This is the United States (plural). It was designed as a coalition of largely independent states, What does that have to do with anything? The U.S. president is the president of all people of the U.S. — applying per-state FPTP plainly distorts the vote. It doesn't have anything to do with state sovereignty or independence, it's simply a very poor voting system. Or are you saying the states should elect the president? I'm quite sure the U.S. general public won't agree with you on that. > and that is never going to change other than at gunpoint. The addition of this half-sentence reads as incredibly odd. Are you expecting someone to show up and hold the U.S. at gunpoint? > Heck, not even Italians get to vote in German elections, Italians do in fact get to vote in German municipal and EU elections if they have a permanent residence there. Same for any other EU citizen residing in any other EU country. Only for country level elections you vote in your country of citizenship rather than residence.

Turing_Machine 2y ago
> > and that is never going to change other than at gunpoint. > The addition of this half-sentence reads as incredibly odd. There are millions of Americans who have taken oaths to defend the Constitution of the United States (Not "the government". Not whoever currently happens to be President. Not some "monarch". The Constitution) against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Virtually all of people these have military experience (it's part of the standard military oath, also in the oaths of office for many government officials). Attempting to forcibly change the Constitution outside the normal amendment process would almost certainly result in large-scale bloodshed, and changing it through the normal amendment process is never going to work, because the smaller states are never going to sign off on it. Those are the facts on the ground.