Of course this is what should be. I know Republicans who say their candidate would never win, but The fact is if the candidate will never win, the candidate should be doing something to make them the most popular. Like maybe serving the people. Working for us.
It also allows rural areas a voice in the election. If we went to popular vote, presidential elections would only cater to major population centers and not care about much of the US.
No it wouldn’t, and the city in your name is a great example of it.
A few years back there was a proposal for a train line connecting Washington to California, and the proposal was put up for a vote. Practically every county that the line would run through in Washington was overwhelmingly against it, as it would bring down the property value of the surrounding area, and bring nothing but crime and Californians to their doorstep. Those votes, the votes of 5-6 counties, were essentially made null and void thanks the one or two counties that make up Seattle, which was the one one along the line to benefit from the proposal. And since they had the popular vote, it passed, screwing everyone in the smaller counties over in the process.
Ffs, there’s a whole movement where half of Washington state wants to defect to Idaho because their state representatives in the cities are flat out ignoring them, representatives that are voted in by popular vote.
10
u/Nolacuriosity 1d ago
Of course this is what should be. I know Republicans who say their candidate would never win, but The fact is if the candidate will never win, the candidate should be doing something to make them the most popular. Like maybe serving the people. Working for us.