The problem is if you allow more direct democracy, then New York, California and Texas would always decide the election while states like Wyoming, Montana and others would effectively have no real representation. How is that fair? The truth is no matter how you slice it, democracy isn't really fair at all since the majority will always dictate their will to the minority. This is why America's Founders saw democracy as a necessary evil rather than an actual system that government should be based on. By providing a bill of rights and being more focused on liberty, it serves as a measure to counter democracy. Democracy is only there because there is no other effective way to put leaders into office without having a formal dictatorship. Besides, since the US adopted it's current constitution in 1787, there have only been five elections where the President-elect did not get the majority of the vote so it isn't like it happens all the time. 

Trump few years ago was against all this war and death now he is in office he has been given his orders, In fact he spoke out agianst going to war in middle east. I guess the zionist lobby is very strong in USA. Iran hasnt hurt anyone i cant recall any war etc apart from the iran iraq war which shoyldnt have happened

I just hope that if Trump does pick a fight with Iran Europe will make the US themselves clean up the mess for a change.

If that was a good comparison you would be on your way to a workcamp for making that comment.

The people in USA have freedom and laws protecting them.

The US is not, and was never technically a straight-up Democracy though, it's a Democratic Republic. The people don't have the final say, but they elect those in power to represent them by way of the individual states. And that's the best way to do things, especially with such a massive country with a population of 325 million.

The Electoral College might seem odd to outsiders, but for us Americans it actually makes quite a lot of sense. Sure, it's not a perfect and completely fair system, but from what I can tell it's about the closest system we can get to it, with our circumstances of being such a large country with such a huge and diverse population taking up a whopping 50 states.

The electoral college ensures that people from ALL states are represented with relative parity (and of course the number of electoral votes still differs depending on the population. So obviously Callifornia's going to have a much bigger amount of electoral votes than Idaho, so there's still some democratic aspect to it. It's just the majority votes within the STATES reside moreso over the entire COUNTRY'S popular vote as a group).

This system prevents the coastal cities (So Cal/LA and New York mainly) to essentially dictate the politics of the other 48 states and countless 10's of millions of people living in Middle America. If we simply boiled everything down to the popular vote, you'd basically have LA and NY deciding every single election, because of the massive amount of people condensed into these major cities, which would not go over too well. What's best for the coastal elites and city folk isn't necessarily what's best for the blue collar family living in Cincy, or the rural residents of Omaha Nebraska. And with such a massive landmass, people here often have very different circumstances, living conditions, and experiences.

Now I suppose you could make the argument that maybe some more states could implement a splitting of the electoral votes rather than having mostly a "winner take all" system, but for the most part this system seems pretty fair given how the US is set up.

1. I don't live in West Korea, so as much as Dear Leader would love to throw me in one of West Korea's MANY for-profit prisons (workcamps) on bogus charges (happens a lot over there), it just isn't going to happen. 

2. Hahahahahaha.  Good one.  Get back to me when West Korean males between 18 and 25 aren't legally obligated to sign their lives over to the State.  Maybe West Korea will finally meet the minimum standard to be considered free when people don't risk the prospect of a 250 000 USD fine/spending five years as a political prisoner for the "crime" of refusing Selective Service.

Freedom and laws protecting them, lol.  As if their basic human rights aren't being held hostage.

A digital poke is like letting one rip and hoping the jerk across the ocean get's a whiff, which they won't. It's nothing but hot air after that.

He acts like a 8 year old boy on Twitter. It's funny, and sad, but mostly funny. Do people in the USA take him seriously? He's like a meme generator.

So if we're West Korea, is Theresa May essentially Neville Chamberlain?

The geopolitical shift is underway, but by no means does it have to mean the decline of western civilization, the rise of dictatorial powers, or the kissing up of western countries to said dictatorial powers.