Read on Twitter
So much that is wrong here.
First, a quibble: The three largest states combined - Cali, Texas and Florida - don't have anywhere close to half the votes in the USA. (The top nine states together do, though). https://twitter.com/PastorDScott/status/1324743189912309762
First, a quibble: The three largest states combined - Cali, Texas and Florida - don't have anywhere close to half the votes in the USA. (The top nine states together do, though). https://twitter.com/PastorDScott/status/1324743189912309762
Second, without the Electoral College, state don't vote in unison. There's no way the entire voting population of any state would ever vote the same way, so the sort of thing Dr. Scott imagines could never happen.
Third, the situation Dr Scott says he wants to avoid, is what's caused by Electoral College.
Because the EC creates a situation where entire states DO, in effect, vote in unison. Because of that, a handful of "swing states" are "deciding the entire country."
Because the EC creates a situation where entire states DO, in effect, vote in unison. Because of that, a handful of "swing states" are "deciding the entire country."
Fourth, the EC disenfranchises millions of Americans.
Consider the millions of conservative Californian voters. It makes no difference (in the Presidential race) if tens of millions of them vote, or if none of them vote. Because with the EC, their votes count for nothing.
Consider the millions of conservative Californian voters. It makes no difference (in the Presidential race) if tens of millions of them vote, or if none of them vote. Because with the EC, their votes count for nothing.
The "without the EC, only a few states will decide the election" is an argument that dumbfounds me, because it's a precise inversion of reality. With the EC, only a few states decide who's president. But without the EC, every vote in every state is equally important.
/end rant
/end rant
