-
Well, I've been wondering that myself considering we have a huge problem with Gerrymandering. We have the technology and means to do popular vote now, but that scares both parties because they know they will lose some control if it's implemented.
-
SLAMt4sticにより編集済み: 1/19/2014 5:00:39 AMBurrito and Decitron both hit the nail on the head. Actually collecting and counting a popular vote (at that time) would be quite the task. Having smaller areas all report through the electoral college was seen as an easy, fair solution. Now we know this is not the case as politicians are always redistricting to try and keep power etc. etc.
-
Early in the US's history it was used to allow everyone to have the power of the vote but have it filtered through people that were educated while giving power to the higher class. This was so the poor couldn't bully the rich through the vote (Like no taxes for poor but 99% tax on anyone making more than say $10,000,000 a year). During this time it was believed that the uneducated could easily be manipulated (true) and create a form of political Darwinism. [spoiler]Source: My boring textbook with no pictures.[/spoiler]
-
1 返信
-
Before the advent of computers, compiling a popular vote would have been problematic, and the Founding Fathers were untrusting of the uneducated masses. There isn't much practical reason for it in modern times, however, but forces on both sides of the isle wish to keep it in place as it makes the system more easy to manipulate through systems such as gerrymandering, targeted voter suppression, and so on.
-
2 通の返信
-
2 通の返信Because that is who really chooses the president. Theoretically they are supposed to vote off the popular vote but as seen by elections where a president loses the popular vote but wins the electoral college, that doesn't always happen.