Yeah, $1000 is couch change these days. How many voters counter the millions of dollars that out of state wealthy donors are giving to congressmen?
Besides, it’s doubtful to be that one sided. It’s more going to be 600 like minded voters disagreeing with my position, and 400 or so agreeing with it.
Thank you for kind words. And you’re right, I don’t remember you.
Seriously? 
I’m hoping this was said tongue in cheek with a heavy dose of sarcasm and irony. If not, well…it should be a pretty rude awakening when you figure it out.
You do realize that just because someone is aware of our peculiar electoral system, someone does not need to feel that it is the best way of doing things. No republican president has won the popular vote as a non-incumbent candidates since 1992. Democrats have won the popular vote in every election but one since then.
It is an odd feature that the person or party that receives the most support of the people doesn’t get to represent the people.
You might want to ask 16oz Bloomberg if his millions were well spent trying to influence the voters who chose to repeatedly reject his choice of candidates.
What is in doubt? I specifically said, “If it comes down to a choice between your out-of-state $1000 donation vs 1000 like-minded, eligible voters who disagree with your position”. $1000 vs 1000 like-minded, eligible voters who disagree with you. This isn’t rocket surgery.
Is the thought of 1000 people disagreeing with you too much to bear? A negative 200 is OK, but 1000 is too many?
Besides being SOP since the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1788, I assume that most people are aware that many/most parliamentary forms of government do not directly elect their Prime Minister by popular vote, either. The political party with the majority of seats, or the coalition party with the majority of seats, selects the PM.
What is in doubt is for your hypothetical to ever reflect reality.
Ummm, no? I don’t see where you are trying to go with this. Are you trying to say that the congressman only has 1000 voters, and they all disagree with me? If not, then your hypothetical is stupid, if so, then you are.
Since when do we have a prime minister?
squeakyhinge is saying that the EC has been in place since the ratification of the US Constitution. However, in the first four elections, it functioned as intended by the Founders. Then, in '04, due to the frustration experienced in the election of '00, the EC was Amended to ultimately become the party rubber stamp that it now is. Restoring it to its original form might serve to greatly relieve the chickenshit aggravating dog-and-pony-show party fest that modern presidential elections are.
Who said we had a Prime Minster? Did you read what I actually wrote, or did someone incorrectly read it to you?
You brought up prime ministers, as if they were in any way relevant to the US’s democratic process.
As we have a different political system than those that have prime ministers, your post contributes nothing.
I’m saying that your out-of-state $1000 pales in comparison when compared to 1000 opinionated, in-state voters who disagree with the advice you’ve offered their U.S. Senator(s). Do you expect the Senator(s) to jump at the chance to represent your single, not-eligible-to-vote-in-their-state position, or would they be swayed by the requests of 1000 actually-eligible-to-vote constituents?
(post shortened)
Yes, I did bring up Prime Minsters and the parliamentary system of government. I did not say we had a Prime Minister.
But I’m saying that your hypothetical is so far divorced from reality that it is meaningless.
If what you are saying had any meaning, then congresscritter would not be taking money from outside of their states or districts. They would not be listening to donors from outside their districts.
They do. People give them lots of money, and they take it and they listen to them. You are trying to argue that they would not be doing somethign that the are in fact doing.
Did you have any way of relating that to the conversation at hand?
Other countries do things differently. We know that. What relevance does it have to how our country does things?
Politicians will take as money as you wish to donate. That’s a given.
Do you have any advice for those people who only wanted to contact (sans gifts) the Senators of states other than their own?
Some people might not have been aware that other democracies ALSO do not elect their leader by popular vote. I believe it falls under the general idea of fighting ignorance. Why do you want it to take any longer than they thought it would?
Christ Amighty, someone’s got a LOT of time on his hands this evening.
Sure, give 'em a call, write 'em a letter, send 'em an email. Let them know your opinion and/or analysis of pending legislation.
I seriously doubt that there were any following this thread that learned anything new from your statements.
I assume that more information is better than less. YMMV.