- Dec 11, 2005
It's actually a genius system to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority by shifting the power of the majority slightly.The electoral college is antiquated,
And yet you're against the Electoral College and would prefer a majority rules, popular vote system instead?I am not a big fan of this all or nothing awarding of the votes.
I agree, that would definitely be a better compromise over simply getting rid of the Electoral College. One of the things that has always bothered me about our popular vote statistics is that quite a lot of people will not bother voting because they are a right winger in a dark blue state, or a left winger in a dark red state, etc. I imagine that if we actually did have a popular vote system for determining who our next President is, we would experience massive record high voter turn out.Awarding them proportionally would be a better compromise.
In reference to the shift of both parties to the right, this really took effect when Reagon went after religious voters. The democrats were forced to go after them too. There has always been a courtship of religious votes, but not in the same way. It has continued ever since.
The other notable swing came from the Tea Party. They were /are a hard swing to the right. They also seem to be the breaking point for the masses.
What makes you think it was ever a moderate conservative idea? Because Nixon liked it? I don't think that logic follows. It's like the people who claim the ACA was a conservative idea because Romney liked it.One of those radical ideas that the right is crying communism over was wanted by Nixon. How has universal healthcare gone from a moderate conservative idea to communist?