this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
1168 points (98.2% liked)

News

22890 readers
4190 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

65% of U.S. adults say the way the president is elected should be changed so that the winner of the popular vote nationwide wins the presidency.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AnonTwo@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I feel like while the electoral college is an issue, it's the gerrymandering that is ultimately the biggest issue.

And in fact probably also contributes to the electoral college issue.

[–] xtr0n@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The senate is pretty bad too.

In theory we could expand the number of house seats so that more populous states get more reps and everyone has a more equal number of voters per congressperson. I think that would not only help make the house more fair but would also make the electoral college more fair (since the # of electors increases with the number of house members). Not as good as the popular vote, but it’s an improvement that doesn’t require a conditional amendment.

[–] Changetheview@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Although it’s somewhat inconceivable to some people that the US can have more than 50 states (and that DC isn’t what it once was), don’t forget about representation for DC and Puerto Rico.

Both which operate very much like state entities now, making a pretty good argument for true federal representation with proper voting power.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Representation for DC would be harder to justify, but if a party actually pushed for it Puerto Rico statehood would have a fair chance.

[–] Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The US has less representation per capita than most developed nations.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

To be fair, it's also the most populous developed nation.

[–] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

What you're talking about is the Wyoming Rule or something similar to it. We fucked up our Government and we really really need to get rid of the Re-Apportionment Act of 1929.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Gerrymandering only directly impacts the House, while the EC biases the presidential vote, and state sizes bias the senate. All three elected branches are badly selected and all three are biased towards the Republicans. Hard to say the House is more important than the presidency though.

[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Some more fuckery with the house: Each state is supposed to get at least one representative, plus another representative per every so many people, right? And historically the house has expanded to fit the growing population, right?

That's not how it works anymore. They stopped expanding it when it was obvious the Republicans would never have a majority in the house ever again. Go look at the algorithm they use to determine how many representatives each state gets.

[–] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

They stopped expanding it when it was obvious the Republicans would never have a majority in the house ever again.

No.

The size of the HoR was set in 1929 and since then the Democrats have controlled it for multiple years at a time. Heck at one point they were in control of it for 45 straight years! There's been a number of multi-year stretches since 1929 where Democrats controlled BOTH bodies.

https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2020/jun/25/control-house-and-senate-1900/

The Re-Apportionment Act of 1929 that fixed the size of the HoR at its current 435 is a big chunk of the problem with the EC and quite a few other things. It needs to be undone.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

and state sizes bias the senate

That was entirely intentional though?

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It was a bad idea necessary to bribe the small states into joining to keep the colonies together in a time with more important issues. The EC's population bias was also intentional, it doesn't make it not fundamentally undemocratic.

And the admission of states has always been very political. They have been often admitted in pairs to maintain political parity of the time and other proposed states (the state of Sequoyah) were rejected for political reasons (balancing east-west states or just racism, you decide). There's a reason statehood for Puerto Rico, a territory with more than enough people and no historical impediments like DC, isn't just a formality of waiting for a request by its people.

The Founding Fathers made a quite good first draft for modern democracy, but they weren't oracles and they made compromises based on the political needs of the day. There's a reason we don't install American democracy in countries we regime-change.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Democracy wasn't intended, I agree with that, but I don't think many wanted an entire democracy either, it wasn't just about states wanting power but also about minority representation. I personally prefer a constitutional system to a democratic system.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I mean, sure. They were also slaveholders. This is just trivia not something speaking to what should happen in the current day.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Because the constitution was the charter, the binding contract underwhich previously separate political entities agreed to be governed. You can't just change my rental contract to kick out my roommate midway through my term without following an established process we both signed on.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Talking about the constitution protecting minority representation at anything but the state-vs-state level or acting like it's a personal contract any of us at any point voluntarily entered into or could have rejected if not structured in this way is a laughable diversion. How it was made and that it exists as the current law of the land is irrelevant in a discussion of its current failures.

Again, there's a reason we don't implement it in other countries. It persists here because of inertia and cynical resistance by a minority party that can't win governing power without it, but it's not a good system in a country that purports to gain moral justification for its government through all of its citizens being equal.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yes it was a contract at a state to federal government level, furthermore, it is a binding concession of power from the federal government

through all of its citizens being equal.

Equality doesn't mean democracy. Democracy grants a majority power over a minority.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 1 points 11 months ago

Now 1 person 1 vote isn't equal? Democracy is everyone has the right to state their preferences and be treated equally. That sometimes more people want the other thing isn't a flaw in the system and in no way a justification to just give some people more votes. A tyranny of the majority is a whole lot better than a tyranny of the minority.

I swear there must be some kind of rural state indoctrination camp where people learn that 1 person 1 vote is actually bad and they're rightfully entitled to more say than those dirty city-dwellers. All while talking about the minority rights carefully crafted by the slaveholding men who literally transferred votes from the slaves to their oppressors.

[–] Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago

I don't really understand how we fix gerrymandering. Districts can sue the state for making their elections more competitive, less competitive, or a perceived slight. Every time maps are drawn, 99.9% of districts become less competitive, offering a safer win for both of the two major parties where they expect to win. Strategically voting for third parties that can put Ranked Choice in place is... Possible, but incremental.

So yeah it seems like ending the electoral college is less complicated. It seems very popular with most people and half the politicians.