>The fact is that our Constitution reduces voting rights for those that live in populous urban areas and gives outsized voting rights to those that live in rural/sparsely populated area
yup, that was by intention. That's also exactly why the senate was erected; they didn't want smaller states to be ignored by campaigns that could ultimately just focus on enough electoral votes to win the election.
>This rationale/compromise may have made sense in the late 1800s, but it's difficult for me to see how this is a good thing now. I wonder how many presidential elections we can go where the "winner" receives fewer votes than the "loser" before people seriously question what the purpose of our democracy is.
I'm not sure. the exact same gaming would work today if we aboloished the Electoral College tomorrow. The same gaming could happen today; you focus on CA, NY, TX, and FL and you have a large chunk of the population talked to in one swoop. But that leaves 40+ states de-prioritized. figuring out how to solve that without putting the fate of the country in Ohio's hands is a delicate balance to seek.
I'd personal prefer for spillover voting to help ease off the polarization of it all, but that would be an even more uphill battle. Obviously both parties would not want to lose any potential power.
yup, that was by intention. That's also exactly why the senate was erected; they didn't want smaller states to be ignored by campaigns that could ultimately just focus on enough electoral votes to win the election.
>This rationale/compromise may have made sense in the late 1800s, but it's difficult for me to see how this is a good thing now. I wonder how many presidential elections we can go where the "winner" receives fewer votes than the "loser" before people seriously question what the purpose of our democracy is.
I'm not sure. the exact same gaming would work today if we aboloished the Electoral College tomorrow. The same gaming could happen today; you focus on CA, NY, TX, and FL and you have a large chunk of the population talked to in one swoop. But that leaves 40+ states de-prioritized. figuring out how to solve that without putting the fate of the country in Ohio's hands is a delicate balance to seek.
I'd personal prefer for spillover voting to help ease off the polarization of it all, but that would be an even more uphill battle. Obviously both parties would not want to lose any potential power.