Comment: Voting Process, Winner-takes-All, & what really happens.

(See in situ)


Garan's picture

Voting Process, Winner-takes-All, & what really happens.

There are several topics in the air here.

Winner-takes all. Bad. We agree. (right?).
Should be fix? Yes.
How? There we don't see eye to eye.

Actually, I don't know how you propose to fix that.
I only see you disagree with the idea that a populous vote for president will get rid of the current effect and gaming of Winner-takes-all determinations at the state level.

The idea that the founders had is great.
However, in practice, the system is gamed by the two major political parties. Winner-takes-all will never disappear as long as one political party dominates each state, which is the case everywhere.
I don't think complaining about the two-party system is going to change anything, something needs to be done.

So far, a national populous vote appears to me to be a good step. Not perfect, but better than what we have.

This can only be implemented if enough states enact it.
Also, those states can withdraw their enactment in the future if they choose. The states would still have that power.

As far as who recent and future presidents serve, their actions make it clear, the Federal government itself. Not the individual states.

The Federal government continually tries to homogenize the states into a single vision. I believe states should and are supposed to have more power and individuality. Nationally homogenized institutions lead to fragility of the entire system in that mistakes and failures effect the entire system, and the evolution of state governments is prevented.

So, it's ideals and design, verses current practice and perversion.