|
|
|
|
|
by bwanab
591 days ago
|
|
Historically the electoral college was a compromise that allowed for the counting of slaves as 3/5 of a person for the purpose of taxation and voting without having them vote. Consider a state like South Carolina which at the time had about 50% of its population as black. How could the 3/5 of the 50% of the people get added to the total otherwise? Any method would be a hack, but this one had the benefit of being able to create a justification that it protected small states from being dominated by large states. If you're American living in one of the majority of states that aren't "swing" states, I don't think you can escape the feeling when you vote for president that you're going through a kind of charade since the winner is going to be determined by some small number of voters in 6 states. |
|
I don't get the repeating of this perspective, didn't he win the popular vote this time? How did "small number of voters in 6 states" affect this reality?
Isn't winning the electoral college but not the popular vote a statistical minor occurrence? People don't know how to lose.