• Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    In 200 odd years there’s been something like 1 case of a faithless elector. For all intents and purposes it’s a filtered general vote. The electors just carry out their district/state’s will.

    • visak@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not the issue so much as the “rounding” in the way electoral college votes are distributed. Plus states that do “winner take all”. It has the effect of skewing the results away from being proportional to the popular vote.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Okay? That’s not what they said though. They said elected representatives choose the president. That’s just completely wrong in every sense but the most technical.

        • visak@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I was more replying to you, that it’s the filtering I have issue with. I’m other words I agree that “faithless electors” is not really an issue rather my problem with the electoral system is that it’s not a passthrough and does change the outcome.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah. I’d love to see a system that represented people and not land. But we didn’t keep up with the whole Constitutional Convention every 20 years thing. And the founders were dealing with 13 governments that had their own national egos. So they had to play to those governments instead of the actual people and now we’re stuck with the system. The proportional representation pact is the current best shot. Followed by an amendment and then rolling the dice with a modern Constitutional Convention.

    • MrTulip@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That would be true if electoral votes were proportional to states’ populations. As it is now, your vote counts (I think) six times more if you live in Wyoming vs if you live in California.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I didn’t say it was a good filter. Just pointed out that the people sent to the electoral college do not have any agency to select the president.