Taken from JRE #1337 w/Dan Crenshaw:
https://youtu.be/MIWrmgPNUqQ
Video Source
47 Comments
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Taken from JRE #1337 w/Dan Crenshaw:
https://youtu.be/MIWrmgPNUqQ
Video Source
You must be logged in to post a comment.
We need the electoral college but we don’t need the “winner take all” aspect. Be like Maine and Nebraska. Allocate the electors by the number of votes a candidate gets in that state. 25% of pop vote = 25% of electoral votes received
What a bunch of nonsense!
You're close Dan. The current law allows the state to assign the electoral votes. This allows a winner take all scenario which creates the situation you're trying to avoid. No way every district in CA is democrat yet that state is a guaranteed 52 electoral votes for Democrats in every federal election. The federal government should allocate the votes in a federal election by federal district and while we're at it eliminate 2 votes from each state to compensate for the Senate and you would have both electoral and popular vote parody as well as a true reflection of the will of the governed. At least that's how I see it.
We need blockchain voting
Dan Crenshaw is being totally disingenuous when he says the Founding Fathers created the Electoral College so the "biggest population centers can't tell everyone else what to do." At the time of the first census, in 1790, The 10 biggest cities in the USA combined was a whopping 3.6% of the population (8% today). The USA was a country of farmers with a few small cities. There was no need to "protect" rural America from the population centers since those didn't exist! Slaves made up 17.8% of the population and 39.1% of the biggest state which was Virginia and there you see the actual purpose of the electoral college.