Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-14-2020, 03:45 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,649
Originally Posted by Folacin View Post
They fit in with 100 Senators and 9 SC Justices for the state of the union, so they could make it work. But I agree that they should institute rules to allow virtual votes.

And the law setting the size of the House should be changed to set the number to the total population from the last census, divided by the population of the least populous state, rounded up (or down, +/- one doesn't matter much).
There is also a gallery where they can fit hundreds more and they can swap out the chairs and fit in another few hundred. They could probably fit over a thousand if they really wanted to.

But the idea to go virtual probably makes the most sense.
Old 04-14-2020, 04:00 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,840
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
My basic premise is that there would not be significant argument over the electoral college today but for Bush v Gore and Trump v Clinton. Its largely driven by people who think that Bush and Trump are illegitimate presidents who would never have won the election if elections were actually fair. It is for the most part partisan bullshit.

I suspect you didn't have much objection to it before bush v gore. I have yet to meet anyone that did.
I was a college student -- I don't remember if I had an opinion on the EC. My memory of 2000 was that Gore was cheated out of the election, but by SCOTUS and Florida officials, not by the EC.

I started thinking the EC was terrible once I started believing in the "1 person 1 vote" principle. I don't remember exactly when that was, but it was long after 2000 and long before 2016.

It's relevant because a democracy governs itself and any idea that cannot gain popular support and is not in defense of minority rights is at best not viable and at worst tyranny.
Discussing and advocating an idea is the main way to "gain popular support". And the EC doesn't defend minority rights in the least. It doesn't even defend majority rights! It defends the rights of geographic boundaries, which I think is a bullshit right to defend.


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to:

Send comments about this website to:

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

Copyright © 2017