Should the US switch to popular vote vs. electoral college?

[Grand Britannia]

Because we are a union with a bicameral congress. We are the United States of America

Neither of those answer my question.
WHY do the states need a representative on the national level?
Why shouldn't the people simply be allowed to vote themselves?

You are supporting a system where there is LESS representation by the people for no conceivable reason.

*Represents the union of the states and thus the whole nation

[Genivaria]

Neither of those answer my question.
WHY do the states need a representative on the national level?
Why shouldn't the people simply be allowed to vote themselves?

You are supporting a system where there is LESS representation by the people for no conceivable reason.

*Represents the union of the states and thus the whole nation

No it represents the states and therefore does NOT represent the whole nation.
The nation is actually made up of people at it's core.

It by it's very nature excludes all political minorities in each state.
So all the non-Republicans in Texas or Mississippi simply have no vote and all non-Democrats in California and New York might as well stay home because their vote simply doesn't matter.

This is a system that is essentially allows the entire country to be gerrymandered and huge swathes of the people to be ignored.

[Grand Britannia]

*Represents the union of the states and thus the whole nation

No it represents the states and therefore does NOT represent the whole nation.
The nation is actually made up of people at it's core.

It by it's very nature excludes all political minorities in each state.
So all the non-Republicans in Texas or Mississippi simply have no vote and all non-Democrats in California and New York might as well stay home because their vote simply doesn't matter.

This is a system that is essentially allows the entire country to be gerrymandered and huge swathes of the people to be ignored.

Uh, no. The Senate is what represents state governments, the President represents the union as a whole.

Going "nah uh" doesn't change that.

[Genivaria]

No it represents the states and therefore does NOT represent the whole nation.
The nation is actually made up of people at it's core.

It by it's very nature excludes all political minorities in each state.
So all the non-Republicans in Texas or Mississippi simply have no vote and all non-Democrats in California and New York might as well stay home because their vote simply doesn't matter.

This is a system that is essentially allows the entire country to be gerrymandered and huge swathes of the people to be ignored.

Uh, no. The Senate is what represents state governments, the President represents the union as a whole.

Going "nah uh" doesn't change that.

I'm not going 'nuh uh' but thank you for ignoring what I'm saying.

[The East Marches II]

Uh, no. The Senate is what represents state governments, the President represents the union as a whole.

Going "nah uh" doesn't change that.

I'm not going 'nuh uh' but thank you for ignoring what I'm saying.

But you basically did it again just there

[Martune]

Uh, no. The Senate is what represents state governments, the President represents the union as a whole.

Going "nah uh" doesn't change that.

I'm not going 'nuh uh' but thank you for ignoring what I'm saying.

Saying "stay home whereas your vote has no effect" is completely wrong. Every vote matters, you just have to look at the candidate, not the party

[Genivaria]

I'm not going 'nuh uh' but thank you for ignoring what I'm saying.

But you basically did it again just there

No I actually didn't, could you perhaps respond to what I'm actually saying instead of lying?

[Genivaria]

I'm not going 'nuh uh' but thank you for ignoring what I'm saying.

Saying "stay home whereas your vote has no effect" is completely wrong. Every vote matters, you just have to look at the candidate, not the party

The candidate is irrelevant if the party is a minority in your state.
That is HOW the system works. The majority of the state's votes are counted and those are the ones that are tallied on the national level.

[Neo Balka]

?

Senate is for the states
HoR is for citizens
President represents the union

Why do the states need a representative on the national level?

Because ill be fucked if the midwest gets thrown by the wayside by states or regions with bigger populations.

[Martune]

Saying "stay home whereas your vote has no effect" is completely wrong. Every vote matters, you just have to look at the candidate, not the party

The candidate is irrelevant if the party is a minority in your state.
That is HOW the system works. The majority of the state's votes are counted and those are the ones that are tallied on the national level.

Look at the candidate not the party

[The East Marches II]

But you basically did it again just there

No I actually didn't, could you perhaps respond to what I'm actually saying instead of lying?

But you did. Jeez, all the "alternative facts" in this thread.

[Genivaria]

The candidate is irrelevant if the party is a minority in your state.
That is HOW the system works. The majority of the state's votes are counted and those are the ones that are tallied on the national level.

Look at the candidate not the party

Oh sweet jesus it's in one ear and out the other.
Listen to what I am fucking saying.

If Republican X get's 51% of the vote in Texas then 49% of Texas voters simply have no say on the national level.
Republicans are the dominant party and therefore hold the strings to the Texas vote.
The opposite is true for blue states.

[Grand Britannia]

I'm not going 'nuh uh' but thank you for ignoring what I'm saying.

Saying "stay home whereas your vote has no effect" is completely wrong. Every vote matters, you just have to look at the candidate, not the party

That's more of people blindly voting one party than the fault of the system, tbh.

[The Saint James Islands]

The candidate is irrelevant if the party is a minority in your state.
That is HOW the system works. The majority of the state's votes are counted and those are the ones that are tallied on the national level.

Look at the candidate not the party

That’s a nice platitude, but it fundamentally misses the entire fucking point: if one candidate is guaranteed to win in your state, your vote is next to worthless.

[Martune]

Look at the candidate not the party

Oh sweet jesus it's in one ear and out the other.
Listen to what I am fucking saying.

If Republican X get's 51% of the vote in Texas then 49% of Texas voters simply have no say on the national level.
Republicans are the dominant party and therefore hold the strings to the Texas vote.
The opposite is true for blue states.

You have a say, it's your vote.

[Genivaria]

Saying "stay home whereas your vote has no effect" is completely wrong. Every vote matters, you just have to look at the candidate, not the party

That's more of people blindly voting one party than the fault of the system, tbh.

No that is entirely the system.
Although First-Past the Post also plays into it.

[Valrifell]

Look at the candidate not the party

That’s a nice platitude, but it fundamentally misses the entire fucking point: if one candidate is guaranteed to win in your state, your vote is next to worthless.

Mayhapth that the candidate is only guaranteed to win your state because too many people think like you?

[Genivaria]

Oh sweet jesus it's in one ear and out the other.
Listen to what I am fucking saying.

If Republican X get's 51% of the vote in Texas then 49% of Texas voters simply have no say on the national level.
Republicans are the dominant party and therefore hold the strings to the Texas vote.
The opposite is true for blue states.

You have a say, it's your vote.

Since I live in Texas and I haven't seen any Republican I like, no I don't.

[Martune]

Saying "stay home whereas your vote has no effect" is completely wrong. Every vote matters, you just have to look at the candidate, not the party

That's more of people blindly voting one party than the fault of the system, tbh.

I know that, I just don't like political parties

[Genivaria]

That’s a nice platitude, but it fundamentally misses the entire fucking point: if one candidate is guaranteed to win in your state, your vote is next to worthless.

Mayhapth that the candidate is only guaranteed to win your state because too many people think like you?

'Think like you' as in understand how the political system actually works?

[Grand Britannia]

That's more of people blindly voting one party than the fault of the system, tbh.

No that is entirely the system.
Although First-Past the Post also plays into it.

Not sure how you can blame the EC for people voting like sheep for X party all the time just because there's an R and a D next to the candidate name. New York and Texas dont have to be exclusively Blue and Red respectively all the time if people really paid attention to what they're voting for.

[Genivaria]

That's more of people blindly voting one party than the fault of the system, tbh.

I know that, I just don't like political parties

There's nothing wrong with political parties, the issue is a system that discourages opposition.

[The East Marches II]

No that is entirely the system.
Although First-Past the Post also plays into it.

Not sure how you can blame the EC for people voting like sheep for X party all the time just because there's an R and a D next to the candidate name. New York and Texas dont have to be exclusively Blue and Red respectively all the time if people really paid attention to what they're voting for.

Just look at IL. The Dems managed to shit it up so bad that we voted R. If the people choose what they choose, well perhaps the other side should fight harder.

[The Saint James Islands]

That’s a nice platitude, but it fundamentally misses the entire fucking point: if one candidate is guaranteed to win in your state, your vote is next to worthless.

Mayhapth that the candidate is only guaranteed to win your state because too many people think like you?

What is supposed to be the point here?

It’s been stated before in this thread, but when you bundle votes geographically, some areas are going to have particularly strong concentrations of one type of voter, making others irrelevant to the result.

[San Lumen]

Look at the candidate not the party

That’s a nice platitude, but it fundamentally misses the entire fucking point: if one candidate is guaranteed to win in your state, your vote is next to worthless.

every single vote for any office matters. The electoral college makes it so certain votes count more than others.