@AndrewYang
Getting rid of the electoral college is a dangerous proposal. It goes against the entire premise of not only appealing to the most populated sections of the country and it protects the American people from group think-which is more evident than ever currently. It’s dangerous.
Abolishing or amending the electoral college requires a constitutional amendment which js a nonstarter. A more practical approach is making each state’s electors proportional - this would also give candidates an incentive to campaign everywhere.
@Brandon49897353
@AndrewYang
We don’t live in a democracy-we live in a Constitutional Republic. It was designed that way for a reason. The founding fathers feared mob mentality among other things. It’s still on person one vote -it applies to the electoral component of your state.
@zijital
@AndrewYang
Umm...Many if they Northeastern states are small and get attention. It’s depends on how the electoral map will work out...it’s shows that one bit in a state can cause a difference in the electoral make up-much like 2016
@meow2008
@AndrewYang
It counts. That how you choose your representatives form your state and how the electoral college is determined. Based on representation and population.
@wordsaretools
@AndrewYang
You are just incredibly wrong.
Every Republican vote in California is a waste. Every Democratic vote in Mississippi is a waste.
What if NO votes were wasted and all were counted?
What if candidates felt more incentive to campaign everywhere knowing that EVERY vote would count?
@wordsaretools
@AndrewYang
As is our current system is more dangerous. Candidates only give a shit about Florida, the 4 Midwestern states, AZ and North Carolina. That means 43/50 states basically don't matter to the president at all