65% of U.S. adults say the way the president is elected should be changed so that the winner of the popular vote nationwide wins the presidency.

cross-posted from: https://kbin.social/m/news@lemmy.world/t/488620

65% of U.S. adults say the way the president is elected should be changed so that the winner of the popular vote nationwide wins the presidency.

    • Unaware7013@kbin.social
      182·
      1 year ago

      So instead we get minority rule. Soooooo much better when the small number of loonies get to derail a functional government with a temper tantrum that ‘the masses’ want.

      It’s a badly designed system, and claiming it’s like this on purpose doesn’t negate how bad the system is. Also, we should not be chained to ideas that came around 250 years ago when other people have improved on the idea and made it less shitty.

        • Unaware7013@kbin.social
          151·
          1 year ago

          Who gives a fuck about the states’ vote? States are just containers for people, and an excuse that the minority loves to use to explain how they get to rule over majority.

          The electoral college is an undemocratic and broken system that makes my vote in a small state worth more than your vote in a bigger state.

          A vote is a vote, and only losers need to remove the vote from the masses to be able to win. It’s literally the only reason there’s been a Republican president since H.W., and it’s no surprise they’re desperate to keep around the undemocratic voting method that allows them to steal elections they didn’t win.

            • Unaware7013@kbin.social
              9·
              1 year ago

              Wow fascist much?

              Lol, you don’t know what words mean and are just trying to sound cool. ProTip: just because you don’t like something doesn’t make it fascist.

              But I would love to see your melted brain actually explain how ‘every citizen having an equal vote’ resembles fascistic tendencies like only protecting the in group, but that would require an actual understanding of fascism.

              The founding fathers had no interest in a rule by the masses nor do i.

              They also didn’t want anyone other than landholding white men to vote, but we’ve realized that’s a stupid idea. The founding fathers didn’t give you a holy document to be reversed, they wrote a framework they expected us to modify.

              Maybe you should learn the history of our government and why it was designed the way it was rather than pushing weird fascist ideology that states don’t matter and only the federal government counts.

              Bold of you to think I don’t understand why they did what they did and still think it’s a bad system. Also, again with the uneducated claim of fascism.

              And you really need to work on your reading comprehension, I said the states’ votes don’t matter, because I think every citizen should vote, not land.

              We’d break as a nation quickly under your ideology.

              Ahahaha, you clearly don’t see how the nation is breaking down around us under the current system.

                • Unaware7013@kbin.social
                  9·
                  1 year ago

                  I full support only land owning people voting. I have no issue with that at all.

                  I read your fascist take just fine. Why I called you a fascist.

                  LOL, of course the person who doesn’t understand fascism is perfectly ok with implementing proto-facsist policies. You’re all about the in-group protection and out-group punishment too aren’t you, you pea-brained actual fascist.

        • uis@lemmy.world
          21·
          1 year ago

          We are ruled by the states.

          Lines on map can’t rule. Only people can.

    • PizzaMan@lemmy.worldOP
      101·
      1 year ago

      It was designed to be unequal on purpose

      What a convincing argument of its continued existence.

      The electoral is what keeps us from being ruled by the masses.

      It doesn’t do that, all it does is give people in swing states a bigger voice than anybody else, which is a terrible thing for our country.

      Everybody should have a voice, instead it’s just a handful of people in a small set of states.

        • PizzaMan@lemmy.worldOP
          6·
          1 year ago

          Doesn’t sound like you’re a conservative

          I’m not.

          or believe in a republic.

          I do. But ours is in need of reform to make it a better republic that more accurately reflects the will of the people.

          A popular vote would mean the costal areas would have the largest vote and rural areas would get ignored.

          That’s already what happens under the electoral college.

          And every single other electected position in government goes by what is essentially a popular vote, if this was such a problem, all other positions would also be electoral college.

          It would quickly lead to a breakup up of the union.

          The U.S. is the only country that uses an electoral college. All other countries that exist, and are democratic republics use a popular vote and they’re just fine.

          If a popular vote for presidency would cause the destruction of this country, why hasn’t popular vote for all other positions done so already? It’s because this is just fearmongering based on zero evidence. Actually it’s worse, because there is plenty of evidence it wouldn’t do this because of the aforementioned other countries that use popular vote.

            • PizzaMan@lemmy.worldOP
              4·
              1 year ago

              What other position is elected nationally?

              The level at which the election runs is not what I am getting at.

              We only do popular votes at the state level.

              And they don’t destroy our country despite our states having a rural/urban divide. So our federal elections should be no different.

                • PizzaMan@lemmy.worldOP
                  5·
                  1 year ago

                  The level makes a difference.

                  No it doesn’t. If a popular vote would destroy this country because of the imbalance between rural/urban areas, then it would have already done so on a state level.

    • EGG_CREAM@lemmy.world
      3·
      1 year ago

      We have the senate, which is needed to pass any law and gives equal representation to the states. We have the supreme court, which can strike down any law as unconstitutional. We have plenty of checks on mob rule without disenfranchising a gigantic swath of voters.

    • Physnrd@lemmy.world
      1·
      1 year ago

      Then why don’t we institute the “Wyoming Rule?” It’s not “rule by the masses” but much more representative of what the population wants.

        • PizzaMan@lemmy.worldOP
          3·
          1 year ago

          Why change something when it works as designed ?

          This argument could unironically have been used to support the continued use of gas chambers in Nazi Germany.

          Just because something is “working” as designed doesn’t mean we should keep using it. If the design is terrible then it needs replaced.