• @SirEDCaLot
    link
    -338 hours ago

    Then how do you stop urban concerns from completely trouncing rural concerns? Voters from rural areas have valid concerns which are largely opposite of urban voters. If you get rid of electoral college, candidates will campaign in major cities and that’s it. Nobody else will matter.

    • Forbo
      link
      fedilink
      83 hours ago

      That’s what the Senate is for. Two senators per state regardless of population. Wyoming has as much of a say as California does.

    • @GeneralVincent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      254 hours ago

      So the people in cities should just be worth less when they vote? It’s a federal vote for a federal office, everyone in the country should count the same.

      The individual states already have their own powers which make sure the federal government doesn’t make decisions that are bad for those states. And each county and town have their own governments that pass local laws.

      I’ve also heard this argument so many times but I haven’t heard any actual examples.

    • @BlackPenguins@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      22 hours ago

      Even if the 10 largest cities all voted Democrat that would only account for 8% of the vote. And not everyone votes the same way in a city either. There are plenty of republicans voting in major cities but their vote doesn’t matter because of the college. Long Island went to Trump. NYC still got 400,000 votes for Trump. All this means is more people get a voice.

    • @Passerby6497@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      124 hours ago

      Sure, then we can have another republican get elected against the will of the people. Clearly rural concerns are more important than preventing authoritarian idiots like trump from being able to undemocratically take power.

    • Stern
      link
      fedilink
      177 hours ago

      As opposed to now where like 10 states are tossups and the rest are locked in?

      • Schadrach
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -74 hours ago

        Which would be replaced with “Can the Democrat win California by a large enough margin?”

        Which was literally the case when people complain about Clinton winning the popular vote in 2016 - across the 49 states that aren’t California more people voted for Trump, but she won California by such a large margin that she won the popular vote because of California alone. Same thing in 2000, where Gore’s popular vote lead was smaller than his margin in CA.

        • @Passerby6497@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          15
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          Oh jeeeeez, maybe republicans would have to have real policies that appeal to a majority of Americans, instead of dipshit authoritarian policies that only enrich the already rich and take rights away while mainly pandering to racists in the population at large.

          The electoral college is the major reason why the republicans have gone absolutely bugfuck, because they can win with a minority of votes, allowing them to be as undemocratic as they want to be, knowing they have a barely large enough base to squeak through in all the right spots.

          And considering the results of the bush and trump presidencies, you’re making the argument against the electoral college, because their two picks objectively made the country worse.

          • Schadrach
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -11 hour ago

            FYI Hillary did not win the popular vote just because of California

            Yes, she did. That there are other combinations of states that she won that combine to have a similar total margin doesn’t change that her national margin was smaller than her margin in California. And that’s the crux of the argument Snopes makes - she won the national popular vote by 2,833,220 and sure she won California by 4,269,978 votes but there are other states she won that if added together had a combined margin in her favor of more than 2,833,220 votes and also just her California votes alone wouldn’t be enough to exceed Trump’s vote count nationwide so it doesn’t count.

            Which is…kinda ridiculous? It’s a big stretch for a frankly kinda dumb claim.

    • @orrk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      19
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      and what has that gotten us? rural communities are subsidized out the wazoo as the urban centers across America are strangled and starved. as the more powerful minority of people is catered too

      • @AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        123 minutes ago

        Not the previous commenter, but I’m pretty certain that the, apparently fictional book, that Leave Burton showed on either The Daily Show, or Last Week Tonight, entitled It’s all Because of Racism, would cover what the EC’s actual purpose is. Though in this particular case it may be fairer to say classism.

    • Angel Mountain
      link
      fedilink
      15 hours ago

      Pretty sure the rural concerns trumped the urban ones in the last elections in the Netherlands.