wats-good-gabby: rootqueen:shocktease:my-name-is-long:kaayytiee:my-name-is-long:this is wh

wats-good-gabby: rootqueen: shocktease: my-name-is-long: kaayytiee: my-name-is-long: this is why the electoral college fucking sucks. Without the electoral college, the determining factor of the elections would be California, Chicago and New York just because they have more people concentrated in one area. Our system is the best of the best and the people spoke. I’m hurt as well as most of America but the best thing we can do is keep an open mind, accept, and move on. So what? Why does it matter if the majority of votes come from one area? If most of the people in the country want one person to be president, then that person should be president. Why should it matter where they’re from? And that’s not even the reason the college was made in the first place. It was made for 2 reasons.1. The founding fathers didn’t trust the citizens. They thought the citizens were too uneducated to make a good choice.And 2. It’s easier to count the votes of a small group of people all in one place rather than millions across the country when there’s no cars or internet. In today’s age, neither of those reasons are valid anymore. There is no good reason for the electoral college to exist. If the majority of people want someone as president, that person should be president. Here is why the electoral college sucks: Without the electoral college, every single vote would count exactly the same.  No vote anywhere in the country would be worth more than any other vote.  Now you may ask, but Raymond, isn’t it like this already? NO.  IT FUCKING IS NOT. Take Wyoming for example.  Wyoming has a population of 584,000 people.  They also have 3 electoral college votes. This means that each 194,667 votes is worth one electoral college vote in Wyoming.  Now let’s look at California.  California has a population of 38.8 million people and 55 electoral college votes.  This means that it takes 705,455 votes for each electoral college vote.   A VOTE IN WYOMING IS WORTH 3.5X MORE THAN A VOTE IN CALIFORNIA. It literally takes 3.5 times more votes to get 1 electoral vote in California than it does in Wyoming.  How tf is that fair? Don’t come in here and tell me how it’s the best system and without it the only determining factor would be certain cities.  How does that even make sense?  Without it, a vote in New York City is worth the exact same amount as a vote in any other city, or town, regardless of population.  I personally would like my vote to count for exactly the same as anyone else.  My vote shouldn’t count as less because I live in a more densely populated city. What a good explanation! ^ The Electoral College was also devised as a means of appeasing primarily Southern slave-holding states and empowering the clout of Virginia in particular. Look at the comments made by proponents at the 1787 Constitutional Convention and the resulting Three-Fifths Compromise - it was meant to tip the political and electoral power in favor of the South and, at least for James Madison and his colleagues, Virginia against their political opponents. “There is an immediate connection between slavery and the electoral college.”  Mind you, and it isn’t any coincidence, “for 32 of the Constitution’s first 36 years, a white slaveholding Virginian occupied the presidency,” (Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe). In tandem, Thomas Jefferson’s win against John Adams was decisively a result of the increased electoral power of Southern states as a result of the additional votes from slavery, it was said at the time that “Jefferson metaphorically rode into the executive mansion on the backs of slaves.” This ‘pro-slavery’ bias was widely commented upon in 1803 where the Twelfth Amendment, which made reforms to the Electoral College, was widely considered as a means to empower politically and electorally the South. Pennsylvania, granted, had more citizens than Virginia but as a result of Virginia’s expanding slave population Virginia had far more electoral clout than Pennsylvania if the 40% of its population who were slaves were counted (hmm wonder why so many of our early Presidents were from Virginia!). Therefore Virginia triumphed in electoral power because white slaveholders would count slaves as persons only to boost their ability to continue to preserve slavery, offering nothing to the usurped political power of the slaves than continued subordination and oppression.  This isn’t to say that the Electoral College wasn’t introduced because founding fathers were not convinced that the voting population could effectively get educated about national races in a time before much of the technology and transportation of today was non-existent. This isn’t to say that it wasn’t introduced because, as mentioned prior, counting millions of votes by hand and delivering the results by horseback wasn’t a deep concern. This is to say that “not all academics agree that slavery was the driving force behind the Electoral College, though most agree there’s a connection.” It’s also been argued that “in direct elections, candidates would campaign only in large cities,” because you would just have to reach out to the most people and urban areas have concentrated populations. However, “it’s the electoral college that shortchanges voters. Because it makes no sense for candidates to spend time or money in states they either cannot win or are certain to win, thriving cities such as Atlanta, San Francisco and El Paso get no love from White House hopefuls.” Shit I live in Texas and neither candidate gave much of a shit about us lmao (though that did mean not too many attack ads on TV haha!).  So why do we have this archaic relic of colonial times as the deciding apparatus for the Presidency? We have modern technology and getting information about elections in a timely manner is possible. We don’t have an unhinged, tumultuous civil war between slaveholders and free states at hand in the early days of democracy. We have the House of Representatives (both federally and locally - I am looking at you State Houses of Representatives) to tip electoral power in favor of rural counties and states as it is as well as the Senate. 2/5 of the most recent general elections have resulted in a President who did not receive the popular vote, with this being the fifth time in our country’s history. This is not about whether a Democrat or a Republican wins this is about letting go of a colonial relic that was erected to navigate a technologically backwater time and to prop up a slaveholding elite.  -- source link

More pics about