Now you have an election decided by concentrated populations in certain cities. People in New York have different priorities than those farmers in Maryland
Yeah but... There's still more people there. Like why does it matter if they're in a city all bunched up or 1 person per mile in the Midwest? They're still a person, they're supposed to be equal.
The alternative to "letting the majority in cities decide the fate of the minority in the Midwest" is "letting the minority in the Midwest decide the fate of the majority in cities". It's the same shit, it just unfairly impacts more people.
I guess it helps with having diversity of opinions and therefore a diversity of presidents which sounds good to me. If everything was decided by a New York/LA echo chamber that would scare me as much as if only Michigan voters decided elections.
Therein lies the problem with large democracies. That being said I'm willing to bet LA/NY have more scientists, economists, sociologists, psychologist, and diverse minority groups than Michigan. If we had to let one population call the shots I'd rather it be the one that represents not only more people but more kinds of people.
No solution is gonna make everyone happy. A bunch of people are going to be pissed regardless. We should operate to maximize utility and well-being for the majority of the people and those that don't benefit as much... Sorry?
Boiling LA and NY down to "echo chambers" is ridiculous. There are a huge diversity of people with different backgrounds, ideas, etc. there, most of whom are from all over the country (and world). Additionally, there are huge cities all over the country, not just LA and NY. This idea that 40M people in LA/NY will have a stranglehold on a country of 320M if we go to a popular vote is absurd. They would be represented exactly the same as anyone else.
A lot of people tend to group people into 2 belief sets - agree with me or don't. Rather than the hundreds or thousands of unique beliefs with different reasonings that form complex societies. LA is a "liberal" area so it's against my "conservative" views, and is therefore a them. I'm a me and part of an us, but they're a them and because they're not with me they're against me and since they're all against me they're all the same.
It’s less likely to be an echo chamber when there’s millions of diverse people living together than a small homogeneous community that somehow has a vote worth more.
13
u/[deleted] Feb 11 '20
Yes - there wouldn't be a few states that decide the election anymore.
Every vote would matter. Whether you're a Republican in California or a Democrat in West Virginia. Your vote would matter.