this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2024
66 points (93.4% liked)

United States | News & Politics

2026 readers
303 users here now

Welcome to [email protected], where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.

If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.

Rules

Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.

Post anything related to the United States.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

In the South Illinois hypothetical the bigger issue is the extra Senate seats more then the 3 electoral votes.

Really we need to abolish the current upper limit on the house and set it to a population marker again. If we did, the 100 electoral votes the Senate counts for would be an afterthought, because populous states like Cali (presuming something like 1 rep per 100k population.) would have hundreds of reps each.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

The lowest population state should be the benchmark for what population gets 1 rep.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

I think we should allow this. And cites should do the same thing: whenever conservatives do this, cities should undergo mitosis, thereby not only canceling the red tactic, but increasing the liberal count. In fact, we should let this process run until there are 335 million states, and each person is their own elector, senator, and representative. That'd usher in the popular vote, and give each national the incomes and health care of both a senator and a representative, which would be Basic Income on steroids. Plus, the PACs would be busy trying to bribe every American citizen!

It's a gloriously stupid idea.