An interesting point against the proposal to require electoral college votes to be cast in such a way that they represent the national vote: If there's been mass voter fraud in - purely as an example, you understand - NY, Chicago, Portland, Seattle, the candidate who's engaged in this fraud still only wins NY, Chicago, Portland and Seattle. Winning harder doesn't get you anything. If we change that however, every vote that Chicago puts in for their preferred candidate affects the national presidential race.
That's what they want to do. It's why they whine about the electoral college because it gives smaller states a say and doesn't let the democrats rely on simply the north east and west coast.
The next logical progression for them is going to be demanding that big states get more than 2 senators because it isn't fair that the senate can stop stuff the house wants to pass.
That, too, but it would also pay bigger dividends for anyone prepared to engage in fraud. If you can guarantee that the R candidate isn't going to get any votes from, say, Chicago - no matter which way the electorate voted - you can try and swing the national stage.
Theres some treaty the weaselly little fucks are trying to keep on the down low that would do just that but iirc there was a court ruling a couple of months back that basically told it to fuck off.
And even if it didn't it would take so long for enough states to sign on for it to activate (thats the fun part, they keep it real quiet until they get enough states to actually sway shit and then SURPRISE!) we'll all hopefully be long gone.
An interesting point against the proposal to require electoral college votes to be cast in such a way that they represent the national vote: If there's been mass voter fraud in - purely as an example, you understand - NY, Chicago, Portland, Seattle, the candidate who's engaged in this fraud still only wins NY, Chicago, Portland and Seattle. Winning harder doesn't get you anything. If we change that however, every vote that Chicago puts in for their preferred candidate affects the national presidential race.
That's what they want to do. It's why they whine about the electoral college because it gives smaller states a say and doesn't let the democrats rely on simply the north east and west coast.
The next logical progression for them is going to be demanding that big states get more than 2 senators because it isn't fair that the senate can stop stuff the house wants to pass.
That, too, but it would also pay bigger dividends for anyone prepared to engage in fraud. If you can guarantee that the R candidate isn't going to get any votes from, say, Chicago - no matter which way the electorate voted - you can try and swing the national stage.
Theres some treaty the weaselly little fucks are trying to keep on the down low that would do just that but iirc there was a court ruling a couple of months back that basically told it to fuck off.
And even if it didn't it would take so long for enough states to sign on for it to activate (thats the fun part, they keep it real quiet until they get enough states to actually sway shit and then SURPRISE!) we'll all hopefully be long gone.
Until they change their minds.
Which they will.