ok so this "the electoral college should refuse to vote for trump, fulfilling its purpose as envisioned by the founders" meme going around
-
-
besides the college, the founders also set up the senate to serve as a check against the wild, inflamed passions of populism
-
they expected the house to follow the whims of the public, with its two-year terms and direct elections, and the senate to be a bulwark of..
-
...sanity, with its six-year terms and *appointment by state legislatures*. but we got rid of that. undemocratic
-
mind, the founders put all these safeguards in place because they didn't trust their chosen electorate: white male landowners over 21
-
and since then we have expanded the franchise again and again. more democratic this way, see. the old ways are popularly viewed as unjust
-
most states allow convicted felons to vote, several even while they are still imprisoned. but the colonists had brought over the english...
-
...concept of "civil death", which wiped out most rights of convicts for *life*. this stood until the mid-20th century
-
we've been phasing out caucuses and replacing them with primaries because democracy. nowadays a brokered convention would be a major scandal
-
(we even had resident alien voting for much of the 19th century, until it was rolled back during/after world war one. original citizenship..
-
... requirements date to war of 1812--remember, adams's alien act increased the residency period, alien voting was a given)
-
anyway, the electoral college is purely ceremonial now, and demanding it act is to demand a very different form of government than we have
-
nevermind that this would almost certainly trigger a civil war as the various departments gather behind their chosen pretenders
-
oh and remember servicemen were about split between trump and *johnson*, with clinton a distant third, so good luck with that
-
really I vastly discount the impact popular will has on politics, see mostly rule by various alphabet agencies and executive branch staffers
-
but appealing to the college under "muh founders" is antithetical to the past two centuries of enfranchisement and removal of safeguards
-
better to at least be honest and say "voting is bad and we want off this ride." till then, democracy, good and hard
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
The fallacy is imagining that campaigns won't change to court individual voters if this happens. Popular votes are very close
-
in my country unless the winner gets over 50% they go to a second round with only 1st and 2nd position running
-
to ensure thats the candidate the majority wants.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
the EC should be independent, but that's not what the EC has metastasized to in the contemporary era
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.