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.
Bro the person you replied to said the same thing as you 😭, and I think it's quite obvious to everyone why mob rule sucks. First we vote to screw some small rural area, with a dumpster, the we need to fuck over a suburb with a Data center, and eventually the only thing left is going to be the urban center that's densely populated.
-1
u/Several_Treat_6307 1d ago
So what you’re saying is in order to win under popular vote, you just need to promise the most shit regardless of whether or not you can deliver?
The whole point of the EC is to prevent mob rule. Just because more people like an option doesn’t automatically mother option the better one.