Comments by "Digital Footballer" (@digitalfootballer9032) on "Lawrence Lessig: Does the Electoral College Disenfranchize Voters?" video.

  1. What is interesting to think about is that under a popular vote system, we don't know what the results WOULD have been. And that's because the candidates campaigned under an electoral vote system, and the behavior of voters was determined by an electoral vote system. In other words, under our current system, in states like Texas, Clinton wouldn't have campaigned much, and more Democrats would have been less motivated to vote, and in California, Trump would have campaigned less, and Republicans would have been less motivated to vote. Those dynamics change under a popular vote system, so the outcome would not be known. It's like saying a team that scored more runs, but won less games in a World Series would have won under an aggregate run system, instead of a best of 7 games system. You don't know that, because under a different system, the strategies of the teams would have been different...like in a 2-legged football match that is scored by aggregate goals, and give more weight to away goals...you change your strategies from a regular match. I am certainly not advocating a change to a popular vote system, though the electoral system does have its flaws as well. I agree that it does disenfranchise opposition party voters in solid "blue" or solid "red" states. But the advantage is it takes power away from a handful of large population centers and spreads it out nation wide. In my opinion, a system like Maine and Nebraska have is a good compromise between popular and electoral systems. Award 1 vote per congressional district to the winner of that district, and award 2 votes to the overall popular vote winner of the state.
    8
  2. Wrong. There are more Democrats than Republicans, but there are more self identifying conservatives than liberals. That's because there are still old timers out there who are "conservative Democrats", but there are essentially no liberal Republicans. That said, there are more independents than anything. They are a plurality at around 40%. Conservatives are around 30-35% and liberals 20-25%, with a few percent undecided or indifferent.
    2
  3.  @RellyR510  incorrect again. Majority of holders of 4-year degrees are Republican/conservative, and by a pretty decent margin. I will give you that liberals do have a slight advantage in advanced degree holders, however, that is only about 2% of the entire population, and liberals literally lead that category by a few percentage points. The lowest levels of education, such as less than a high school diploma, are majority left as well. The left is basically the dregs of society, and the elites, which make for odd bedfellows, and the right is everyone in the middle, education wise.
    2
  4. I don't think the person coming from a country who lost two world wars, had an economic collapse between the wars so bad that people were burning currency to stay warm because it was cheaper than fuel, and then slaughtered millions of innocent people, has much room to talk about what the best political system is.
    2
  5. How do you figure...CA, NY, and TX still have a much greater number of electoral votes. It would take 10 states like WY and ND, SD to cancel out just one state like NY. Really what it comes down to is the swing States...that, and there is almost always a surprise or two...like NC and IA voting for Obama in 2008, and PA and MI voting for Trump in 2016.
    1
  6. Butthurt over what...that we won?
    1