Ah yes, American "democracy"

Who cares? They are basically just the same person, but one is a gender swap.

>The electoral college exists to keep the majority from deciding

dats sexist

There are 1.7 million people in the state of Idaho.

There are 8.5 million people in New York City.

Only someone with brain damage could possibly argue that one city should have over twice as much influence on an entire country's election than an entire state.

>you're not a tru democracy if you don't follow my arbitrary model of direct universal suffrage xDDD
low-class post

>his country doesn't have separate state and federal governments
>his country also has 20% unemployment rate
I think it would be prudent to not take your advice Spain

It is literally the same here. Rural votes should count more then urban ones.

>having federalism at all
disgusting

Never said that this shithole is any better than your shithole bruv
I guess I have brain damage then

When will Jupiter execute Merkel and ascend his throne as empereur de l'Europe? Together we can fix this terrible world.

Attached: fbf.jpg (1020x888, 181K)

>Rural votes should count more then urban ones.
Woah, this is wrong. This isn't what the American system is about. There is a separation between state government and the federal government, hence why the electoral system is sound. If there was only a single federal government, the 1 person 1 vote system would make more sense

t. rural and suburban retard

Attached: 1516130549659.jpg (250x250, 5K)

A lot of countries do that. For example a party that gets 60% of the votes could end up with only 40% of the seats in parliament.

stop making sense. you are supposed to support the shitalian kid and keep memeing.

gary johnson should've fucking won

*than
Sry, but that's probably my biggest pet peeve. How can someone be that stupid though. The whole sentence has a different meaning if you fuck it up and it's not that hard to get it right, kids.
>Hurr durr rural votes should count more and then urban ones.

>Only someone with brain damage could possibly argue that 8.5 million people should have over twice as much influence on an entire country's election than 1.7 million people.

Delusional.

Attached: 1466102903315.jpg (299x299, 9K)

More like a democratic people's republic

I'm just pointing out it's done, but I don't approve of it. You still got proportional representation in the house of representatives and I think the president should be elected by simple majority. He's the president of all Americans and all American states.

>Only someone with brain damage could possibly argue that 1.7 million people should have over twice as much influence on an entire country's election than 8.5 million people.

The bigger the city you live in, the less you matter basically. Perfect american sense. Muh democracy and equality and freedom.
Trump is a perfect example of how things run there.
And don't give me any of that "what about Finland" bullshit, Finland sucks too just so you know. In different ways than the US but still.

Why would small states even bother staying in the Union if they would have no say over anything?

But wouldn't their vote count just as much as New Yorkers without electoral college? One person, one vote, not 'i'm from idaho my vote counts five times as much'.

because your masters say so, goy

They would, but if anyone tried to impose one man one vote like half the states would say fuck this we're out this was supposed to be a Confederation of States

Your a fucking idiot. The is a difference between state and federal government. If you cant see that, then it explains why Finland is a shithole

And they should have a party-appointed prime minister separate from the president, while we're at it.

God euros are dumb,
You see countries like Canada and USA are much larger than your countries, this makes it so that certain regions have their own economic (sometimes socio-political) interests compared to other geographic regions. Because of this differences the regions have to be split up least one region gets to much legislative power and creates laws and guidelines that only service their region well harming the others

They probably would say that even though it's objectively not true.

whoa m8 chill out, no need to get butthurt over political questions, i don't know about american system so that's why i asked ok peace brah :)

but you can see that Idaho has more electoral votes per capita than the state of New York because each state gets at least 3.

It's how Obama won the democratic nomination even though Hillary had the popular vote back in 2008

As an example lets take the states of Louisiana and California if California was allowed to have the plurality of the vote they would create guidelines that would improve fishery trade deals with nations like Japan and China (ergo making cheaper to trade with them by lowering tariffs). This would kneecap Louisiana fishing industry because they could no longer financially remain competitive with California, which would force fishermen to neither go out of business or move to California

The federal system debt make all of the laws. Virtually everything outside of national defense, immigration, and foreign affairs are done at the state level. Each state can choose it's own tax rates, can choose which industries to subsidize, can choose what social programs it wants to implement. The federal system is just another system above that, and the federal system is frequently at odds with the states, hence why many of then frequently sue the federal system in court.

Thus, it makes sense to use a different voting system for state level and federal level. The federal level system is more equitable as it pertains to federal issues. Should a one person on cite ge implemented at the federal level, the state governments would be unduly swayed by a few populous states, and the system of checks and balances would collapse. Our founding fathers figured this out hundreds of years before calculators where around and before a census was implemented to even see if this was going to be an issue. It was incredibly well designed the way it is

I don't see why people are so mad about this. If Hilary had won despite Trump getting more votes, his supporters would get mad while her supporters would support the system. It was created so minorities, like rural people, have a voice too. However I don't even see the point of democracy in a country where only 128 million out of 325 million vote in elections

Landlets will never be able to appreciate complex system of governments

Why does a man not elected by most americans get to make decisions that affect them all equally?

>Only someone with brain damage could possibly argue that one city should have over twice as much influence on an entire country's election than an entire state.

>where only 128 million out of 325 million
People under the age of 18 cant vote, so this number is brought down probably to 225 million or so. Furthermore, many states are heavily blue or red, so your vote only needs to be called when it seems many constituents in the state disagree. If most people in the state are going to vote red, its not necessary for other red voters to hit the polls, and if they did it wouldn't change the outcome. Realistically, 95% of eligible voters have made a voting choice in one way or another

It doesn't you moron. There is a difference between the state and federal government. This is why Spain is becoming a laughing stock in Europe

Popular vote should decide the winner.
But we shouldn't ignore that cities have much more younger population that may have a very childish worldview and political sense.
This system is not fair,but makes sure that ignorance doesn't win.

just say it's a measure to prevent the tyranny of the majority instead of the"hurr, our founding fathers" cliche.

Why don't we just have 50 presidents?

>It
Learn to speak english, Juán.
Como yo lo veo, Trump fue elegido por una minoría de los estadounidenses. Sin embargo, sus decisiones como jefe de gobierno afectan a todos los estadounidenses. Esto no sería un problema si se pudiese excusar diciendo que es lo que quiere la mayoría, pero al no tener apoyo mayoritario no se puede hacer.

You must be a brainlet. It's not a measure to prevent whatever the fuck you are saying. The US system makes a distinction between state government and the federal government. Do you think we just created one big landmass and then for fun just said "fuck it, let's draw lines on the map and name some different landmasses for the hell of it"

>1.7 million people should have more influence than 8.5 million people

Attached: vraiment ça me fait penser.jpg (1280x720, 93K)

>Do you think we just created one big landmass and then for fun just said "fuck it, let's draw lines on the map and name some different landmasses for the hell of it"
That explains most of your Mid-Western states with straight or square borders. They started our as federal territories right?

Being fluent in English, I interpreted man in this case to referral to the federal government system. Only fluent English speakers would have understood the subtly here. All you've shown me is that you cant speak English and that you got BTFO'd, so you had to hide behind a wall of Spanish

The subtlety, you absolute moron.

That's not the midwest you're thinking of, it's the southwest. Also, I am unsure since much of that came in play from the Louisiana Purchase

I notice all you Euros avoided my point which BTFO'd all of you

>An American defending the Electoral College system in 2018
It's more fun than I had expected

It was her turn bros my suburb in California should be able to outvote 90% of the states. Electoral college is bullshit bro it would be better if territory thousands of miles away from me had no say that would keep us united right bros?

>tfw you collected dozens of hilldawg memes and never got to use them

Japan cannot into federalism.

Attached: Guillemen_d.png (426x446, 147K)

At this point I think its just easier to make fun of your country's 20% unemployment rate

Alright let's walk you through this
>Was Trump elected by the majority of Americans?
No
>Do his decisions affect all Americans?
Yes

How is this ok

That's what democracy is, you idiot. Places aren't people, they do not have voices. The citizens are the source of political power, not the fucking administrative regions.

there hasnt been a democracy since the ancient times. republic is the word youre looking for.

I hate Spain almost as much as I hate America, perhaps just as much.

This. Unitary states all the way.

Attached: 863px-Map_of_unitary_and_federal_states.svg.png (863x443, 126K)

>>Do his decisions affect all Americans?
Wrong, state governments can, and frequently do contest any federal decision made. Hence the purpose of the courts. Also, he does not make every decision. Also, many decisions that the federal government makes dont even pertain to most states.

>The ancient times
When they had slaves?

Attached: the-soul-of-a-man-under-socialism.jpg (1200x628, 128K)

Can they contest Trump's every decision?

There is no reason why the federal president shouldn't be elected by the popular vote when you consider how electoral votes are distributed roughly by state population (they equal the number of representatives and senators from each state)

She just can't catch a break

Attached: 2cylif6.png (398x424, 112K)

>there are “people” unironically defending the electoral college ITT

Remember, daddy Gore is watching you.

Attached: 48D3DA62-4912-4ADC-81B1-AABB91BDDC41.jpg (1360x1692, 127K)

yes, when they had slaves.

>This is why Spain is becoming a laughing stock in Europe

And if Europe became a fill blown federation like we are but had one big popular vote.... Madrid would be one of the big shitty cities ruling over all of Europe along with Paris and Berlin.
Switzerland has some issue?
Too bad, Parisians who don't have the issue overrule you.
Which would lead to war.
That's why we don't do a popular vote.

Through the courts, you can contest every single decision trump makes. It's up to the courts to interpret the intent of the constitution and laws to determine if this is what the founding fathers meant when they had written them. Executive orders by the president are constantly contested

At least electoral votes ought to only count the number of representatives. The inclusion of 2 senators for each state just gives small states more bargaining power than they deserve

Ah yes, but if the courts decide that it does not go against the constitution or against any previous laws, Trump will have made a change against the will of most americans, yes?

100% exactly this. Just look at Brexit. They aren't even a federal union, and already one region has decided to give a middle finger to the rest of them

EU also uses this cancerous system.

>Trump will have made a change against the will of most americans, yes?
No, because the Congress and Senate also have a say, and they have different systems used to fill the political positions. When you look at one system in isolation, it looks stupid. But when you look at the entire government organism, it all makes perfect sense and you can see how the system was designed to allow for fairness to all constituents. To an outside observer who only really seeks the president, they think the system is largely run by one guy, which it isnt

Big city dwellers are subhuman desu. Complete scum.

>The inclusion of 2 senators for each state just gives small states more bargaining power than they deserve
Its checked and balanced by the Senate, the president, and the courts

>Big city dwellers are subhuman desu. Complete scum.
Harsh, but true. What is it about a city that turns people into absolute trash?

Thus spoke Muhammad '' pure occitan blood '' Atlaoui Ben Alì

I wonder what's the theoretical smallest number of votes you'd need to become US president through the electoral college. Like getting 50%+1 in all the smallest states until having a majority in the electoral college

I see, I'll need to read up on how your government works a bit more then
Got any recs other than the constitution and such?

Constitutional republic ≠ democracy

Attached: 18646733_303324773448744_3317570491916484608_n.jpg (320x320, 16K)

9th circuit needs to be split
It was created when the west was sparsely populated and California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington only made up 3.3% of the total population.
Not to mention they just kept adding states and territories to it like Hawaii, Arizona, Alaska, Guam and Northern Mariana Islands.

I'm talking about the electoral college tally for the presidential election, not the Senate body itself. I'm sure equal representation among states at the legislative level is sound

Rural votes should count less, or not count at all.

These American posts are cancer.

Why do Europeans HATE freddom?
This thread proves it tbqh

I could understand if it instead was a simple one vote per state. But it's some weird representative system instead that makes less sense than both other options.

t. room temp IQ

It makes sense when you realize the low pop places allow the high pop places to survive. I'm sorry but a farmer's vote should be worth x5 the vote of some Art student living in San Francisco with his 10 soyboy friends in an overpriced apartment.