| RolStoppable said: But that's not really what this thread is about. What I want to know is who came up with this system in the first place and why they thought that it would be a good idea. Say, a state votes 60% for one party and 40% for the other, how is it a democratic process when the 40% get eliminated and the 60% get powered up to a full 100%? How drunk were the people who made such a system official? Please let the answer be booze. I refuse to believe that the origins of the American voting system stem from perfect sanity. Alternatively, it would be okay if the reason had to do with racism, so the whole thing was a precaution to keep black people down or something like that. |
Remember, the U.S system of democracy is one of the oldest in the world that is still extant. The implications of FPTP were not yet realized. Heck, the framers didn't think there would be political parties with their presidential system, and were quite surprised to see regional coalitions sprout into existence.
We also have to consider that the states were vastly more powerful than the federal government pre-civil war. So, like with say the European Union, it is the member states who decide how votes affect the ultimate decision (through the electoral college.)
You might find it surprising to know that there are two U.S states that split the electoral college vote and do not entail a FPTP system (Maine and Nebraska.)
There is nothing stopping us from pushing more states to do this, or implement other solutions (ranked voting.)
