"If the president were elected by simple majority vote then small states would be overpowered by large states. Thanks to the electoral college the interests of small states are protected."

Okay but... what are the "interests of small states"? Do small states have a consistent set of certain political interests that are clearly distinguishable from the interests that big states have? Do people who live in small states categorically believe or care about different things than people who live in big states do?

Conservatives like to talk about "small states" as if that isn't a category that includes both Vermont and Wyoming.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MemesAreTheory@hexbear.net 0 points 3 years ago (1 children)

I think the argument is simply not made in good faith. It only sounds coherent because it's written into our civil religion and forced down our throats in 7th grade. Conservatives are really just happy about their wildly disproportionate voting power because rural areas are disproportionately conservative. I've had some go mask off and flatly say to me, "if it benefited your side you'd be fine with it too," and it's like, NO DIPSHIT, I ACTUALLY HAVE PRINCIPLES AND A COMMITMENT TO EQUALITY THAT GUIDES MY THINKING AND POLITICS. These people know it's undemocratic, but they're fine with it because 'the right kind of people' get the advantage. Fucking Kulaks.

[–] Swoosegoose@hexbear.net 1 points 3 years ago

nah I'm with the conservatives on this one, imagine if we had an actual socialist party in america, I would 100% want them to use republican tactics if that is what's needed to win. Gerrymander, abuse the electoral college, do whatever they can to enact their agenda (and to be clear in this fantasy the agenda is to benefit the proletariat and end imperialism). I wouldn't complain about it for a second