oh, so it's actually designed to PREVENT everyone's vote being equal? How awesome.

And the idea that California will "decide" for Montana is just retarded, unless EVERY state ends up on one side - not sure if anyone noticed but not EVERYONE in those states votes the same way.

The system is archaic and broken.

One person, one vote.

It's not true to say that everyone's votes aren't equal. It's a nuanced system set up to allow for some complexity. We are a Republic, after all, not a Democracy. I'm actually glad for that as a true Democracy would be crazy. Just look at ancient Athens replacing generals every other week in the middle of a war.

You need to look at it as each state is given electoral college strength compared to their size in the greater Republic. So, your vote in California counts fully in your state. Your state's strength is set up to be representative to to the rest. The way your state goes then represents you in the greater republic in electoral college votes. It's set up this way so that the least populist states don't become utterly swamped by areas of greater population. It's a way to ensure that pure population doesn't overwhelm the whole country on certain topics. It's put in as a balance of power. It's nuanced.

Good luck changing something that fundamental about the constitution though.

Oh I know it, that's a "If I were king for a day" type wish.

My wife, being an immigrant in addition to a woman (so double whammy) is extremely upset by the results of this election. So much so that a good friend of mine who lives just across the border in a red state (and who probably voted Trump given his comment about his guns feeling safe now), is not allowed to come over and X-Wing for the foreseeable future.

Good luck changing something that fundamental about the constitution though.

Sometimes I'm glad we don't have a formal constitution.

Not often, but sometimes.

We have a formal constitution and change it all the time to keep it current. In the 200 years we've had one, I count at least 30, 40 major and minor updates. I believe they will make some new updates coming election, some minor stuff such as including email in the secrecy of correspondence.

I believe they will make some new updates coming election

the states will never agree to give up what little power they have over the federal government. Each state could enact a law that requires their electoral votes go based on the popular vote, there are10 of them now that have done that, and it started in 2007.

They're all very blue states so it had no real impact, but if a republican won the popular vote like Bush did in 2004, they would had to of ignore the will of the people of that state and vote for Bush in the EC.

But given the fact that such a thing is within the power of a state to do, and only 10 have done it so far... There's no way you could get a 3/4th majority of the states to ratify something that removes the EC.

Each state could also enact a law like two of them have now, that makes the EC votes propionate based on how the state as a whole votes... But I don't see that being very likely either. Not unless every state agreed to it anyway.

In some ways the system right now is like MAD, neither side is going to give up it's power unless all sides do it.

oh, so it's actually designed to PREVENT everyone's vote being equal? How awesome.

And the idea that California will "decide" for Montana is just retarded, unless EVERY state ends up on one side - not sure if anyone noticed but not EVERYONE in those states votes the same way.

The system is archaic and broken.

One person, one vote.

It's not true to say that everyone's votes aren't equal. It's a nuanced system set up to allow for some complexity. We are a Republic, after all, not a Democracy. I'm actually glad for that as a true Democracy would be crazy. Just look at ancient Athens replacing generals every other week in the middle of a war.

You need to look at it as each state is given electoral college strength compared to their size in the greater Republic. So, your vote in California counts fully in your state. Your state's strength is set up to be representative to to the rest. The way your state goes then represents you in the greater republic in electoral college votes. It's set up this way so that the least populist states don't become utterly swamped by areas of greater population. It's a way to ensure that pure population doesn't overwhelm the whole country on certain topics. It's put in as a balance of power. It's nuanced.

Not in Illinois. The system doesn't work here. Chicago (primarily democrats) always out weighs the rest of the state (primarily republicans), so geographically this blue state is mostly red, which pisses off most of the rural populace.

Which creates scenarios like Vote Republican, IL goes Blue (I lost), Republican wins (I won) and Vote Democrat, IL goes Blue (I won), Republican wins (I lost). It's hard to understand how my vote even counted.

I voted Sanders because I wanted to cast my rebellion vote and I believed in Sanders, but also knowing **** well that a 3rd party vote was nothing but me standing in the street uselessly flicking the bird at D.C. over the two-party system. Also, since I didn't want Trump, I also knew that my "throw away" vote wasn't actually going to affect HRC from getting the electoral votes in this state, and thus I was in no way "endangering" an HRC victory in my state. Yes, it makes it a hollow rebellion, since there was minimal risk involved; all I can really say it that at the end of the day I voted my conscience, not the system.

The truth of it is, I often don't vote. Why??? IL will always be Blue, so why should I waste my time getting up early before work to go to the polls.

The truth of it is, I often don't vote. Why??? IL will always be Blue, so why should I waste my time getting up early before work to go to the polls.

I haven't gone to the polls in almost a decade. I always vote by mail-in ballot.

It's not true to say that everyone's votes aren't equal.

Sure is that true. Some vote mean literally nothing as there is no representative who could be send out for those voters.

My wife, being an immigrant in addition to a woman (so double whammy) is extremely upset by the results of this election. So much so that a good friend of mine who lives just across the border in a red state (and who probably voted Trump given his comment about his guns feeling safe now), is not allowed to come over and X-Wing for the foreseeable future.

I feel like the US is salt and sugar in the same jar. It looks like we are one, but the truth is that it is a disaster.

I believe they will make some new updates coming election

But given the fact that such a thing is within the power of a state to do, and only 10 have done it so far... There's no way you could get a 3/4th majority of the states to ratify something that removes the EC.

Yeah, you see, that's the difference I think. You guys have amendments, you're not really changing the constitution, just adding stuff. That way you have what, two or three seperate amendments laying out who can vote, an amendment banning the sale of alcohol and an amendment banning that amendment.

We just change the text of the constitution outright. So the secrecy of correspondence article will, as of next year, include letters, telephone calls and electronic communication (though they maybe slow and just include email, but we'll fix that come next election then).

The constitution is a living document meant to accurately reflect the times and mores, instead of just becoming more and more archaic. It's law, not religion. And that, in and of itself is, to me at least, very telling about the US political landscape. Caught in an ever more lagging behind the times system and unwilling to change it.

That's the whole point of US conservatism -- to keep the constitution in it's most pristine condition and interpret the constitution as the founders intended rather as we find convenient today. Obviously we disagree about that, but just because you think it should be a living, changing document, does not mean you are right.

The constitution is a living document meant to accurately reflect the times and mores

It's also intended to be very hard to change so no single person or even single group of people can change it at will. It is supposed to be something the country as a whole agrees too.

The whole point of it is to prevent the tyranny of the majority or the minority.