• MUHn4d0@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    It is not representative tho. I learned in school that a principle of democracy is the equal vote. Each vote counts the same. In the USA each vote counts for a random amount and the people actually electing the president are not even bound to the election results. With the supreme court being this openly corrupt the path to a dictatorship is not that far off.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I learned in school that a principle of democracy is the equal vote.

      In a direct democracy, this is true. In a representative democracy, this is not.

      In the USA each vote counts for a random amount

      It isn’t random, and the amount is absolutely gamed in favor of a certain party, which is, again, why we need strong institutions.

      • Tavarin
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The president isn’t voted on as part of the representatives, the office of the president is a separate vote and is supposed to be a direct vote. But the number of electors for each state has not kept up with each state’s population, which has fucked up the power of presidential votes.

          • Tavarin
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The electors only exist because it made it possible to hold a vote across a large nation in a time when horses were the fastest mode of communication. And each elector was supposed to carry the results of the same number of voters.

            But the country has grown, with some states growing in population much faster than others. Yet the number of electors remains unchanged. Not to mention electors are now completely unnecessary as we have fast and reliable communication methods.

            • SCB@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              You can disagree with the electoral college and still recognize that electors are literally representatives.

              This is basic civics.

              • Tavarin
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                But they aren’t really, they’re just vote messengers, they aren’t on capital hill making laws and advocating for their constituents.

                • SCB@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  All representatives are “vote messengers.” That’s why we call them representatives.

                  • Tavarin
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I would disagree that senators and congressmen are just vote messengers. They run on active platforms, respond to changes in their constituencies (hopefully), deal with new issues as they arise.

                    Electors literally just ferry the states vote to Washington, that’s it and job done. Representatives continually represent the will of their constituents through multiple years, or at least that’s what they are supposed to do.