[Centrino]

Unlike in many other countries, where provinces or regions are merely administrative divisions created to decentralize or streamline administration, the US emerged when states voluntarily came together and decided to create a country. The states were willing to outsource part of their autonomy to a federal level, on condition that guardrails were put in place to limit the power of that federal level. Those guardrails were: bicameralism, equal representation of states in the Senate, and the electoral college. The House is the voice of the people, the Senate is the voice of the states.

The practical consequence of this system is that it effectively prevents a majority of voters from large urban centers from imposing their will onto rural populations, at least at the federal level. It was designed that way.

I've seen comments here claiming that countries like Canada or France deliver better outcomes than the US. They are stronger welfare states, yes, but they also have become overly paternalistic nanny states, with heavy-handed regulations, and high taxes stifling individual initiative.

[spankalee]

The practical consequence of this system is that it effectively allows a minority of voters from rural areas to impose their will onto large urban centers

[mlrtime]

Which you want the opposite to happen , not a better system.

[spankalee]

How in the world is minority rule better than majority rule?

[newfriend]

We don't have minority rule though, we have a balance.

[spankalee]

What?

We absolutely do have minority rule. In both the Senate and the House, the Republican majorities represent a minority of the population.

[newfriend]

Trump easily won the popular vote. What makes you say that they represent a minority of the population?

The fact that both the House and Senate are nearly 50% by party again points to the fact that we have a good balance.