Sorry, but one-citizen-one-vote would be the highest form of "state power", as a citizen can move to another state, take up legal residence and then vote from that state. You don't get any more fair and democratic than that, giving the power directly to the citizen above both the state and federal level. Isn't that what Republicans always claim to want? Power to the individual over the government in decision making laws.
One citizen = one vote, you know it's the most American and patriotic thing to do. Admit it already.
If it was the American and patriotic thing to do, thats how America would have been set up. No one is forcing you to stay or participate in a system you don't agree with.
Um, America is all about dissenting opinions and change if it's deemed worthy. Hell, even our Constitution is open to change; they're called amendments.
What you implied is about the most un-American thing one can say, "don't like it, then leave!".
Trying to change America cause you don't like the rules to win is un American. Yes its open to amendments, when is the last one that has been passed exactly, they are very hard to get done.
Requirements for an ammendment:
A constitutional convention
The legislatures of three-fourths (at present 38) of the states; or.
State ratifying conventions in three-fourths (at present 38) of the states.
I dont think you will like the next one because republicans only need to win like 6 more states to have one. Be careful what you wish for.
Last edited by Sable on Sep 28th, 2017 at 12:34 AM
lol communism is for the SJWs, I'm all for people being allowed to earn and keep their own stuff. That's actually one of risks one runs with a "true democracy" where everything in the country is decided by popular vote. A group majority might decide to take property and/or legal rights from a minority group and vote towards that effect.
That's why we have a system of checks and balances, where if someone wanted to bring back segregation in a given state like say in Kentucky and it won by popular vote, it would be shot down.
But your slippery-slope aside, how do you see this evil happening with removing the EC and given each citizen equal voting power in regards to electing their next president?
You don't even need to eliminate the EC, just make it more accurately represent the people that it's supposed to represent. If a candidate can lose the popular vote by a few million but win the EC by like 70 or whatever it was, then it stands to reason that maybe the system isn't accurately representing the people. It's counting some votes way more than others simply because of what chunk of land they live in, there's really no reason for that.
I seem to remember DDM, shortly after the election, doing the math and showing that using the current system is the only way that could really happen.
One very simple thing that could improve it without eliminating the EC is to make the electorals based on percentage. So instead of winner take all, if you win 60% of the popular in a state, you get 60% of the electorals. This would allow for a more accurate representation of the state, and the nation as a whole, without putting it all in a national popular vote system, which would probably have another set of problems to deal with.
KMC Community Forums
Sep 28th, 2017 12:24 AM
