The US Politics |OT|

[pokymon90]

Bandorr said:

Baalzamon said:

But....land does vote. That's what apparently doesn't make sense to you. We decided to appropriate a certain amount of electoral votes to EVERY state to guarantee that every single state, regardless of population actually can have a true impact in an election.

So when I look at that map, I see a country that is largely...red. The blue is then obviously the highly populated areas (especially the east and west coast but also generally metro areas).

How exactly do you think people in all that red (encompassing about 80%...I'm guessing here percent of the actual land in our country) feel when we take away the electoral college and tell them that it is virtually impossible for somebody they like to ever be elected again.

That's the genius of the electoral system, while it sides heavily towards population still being meaningful (via more electoral votes), those other areas still feel like they can truly have an impact on an election.

California votes: 13,237,598.  Alaska votes: 298,566

If 100 people voted on what to eat, why would the one person that voted chicken get to decide for the other 99? They wouldn't.

Nobody is saying that the 99 have to eat chicken, they are saying you can't feed me fucking beef when I am a vegetarian.

We need to make this federal government smaller. More state's rights the better. We are a union of multiple countries, the federal government should not be in control of half(probably more) the shit they are. That's the point. Californian's should be able to vote on Californian issues in state elections. Alaska should vote on Alaskan issues. 

New laws at the federal level SHOULD HAVE wide support from the whole country, not a couple states, because they will be negative to some, and positive to others.

What is the downside of having states have more rights than they are afforded now? Less centralized? Perfect, that's what we need. This big federal government looming over the country isn't good.