The electoral college was created in a vastly different time than today. The country and cities weren’t the least bit connected: this is the days of horse and carriage: the trains hadn’t even come to connect the country – 100 years before telegraph / telephone and it was 150+ years before the interstate highway system… and 200+ years before the internet.
There was no way those states could really band together in the way they can today.
Fact is, there’s room in the system for faithless electorate. There’s room for faithless electorates and they’ve been engaged many times in the country’s history.
So they’re not inventing anything new here- just using the system as it is for whatever reasons they consider important
Here’s something the states can do if they don’t like the behavior of their electorates:
” On December 13, 2016, States must make final decisions in any controversies over the appointment of their electors at least six days before the meeting of the Electors. This is so their electoral votes will be presumed valid when presented to Congress.
Decisions by states’ courts are conclusive, if decided under laws enacted before Election Day.”
All of this is standard stuff. It’s really not so controversial that there’s 8 electorates that are changing their votes. It’s part of the mechanism and perfectly valid in any and every presidential election
Not every system is perfect. There’s multiple levels. On one level, I suppose it’s designed to protect us from ourselves. But on another level, it has to protect itself from itself.
There’s lots of checks and balances and flexibility within the laws behind these things. Not every contingency has been thought out ahead of time. It allows us the free will to not be entirely bound by laws which constrict rather than empower.
is a good example of the systems empowering free choice even when those choices seems to be contrary to expectations.
I know I’m not answering your question in a simple way but that’s because it’s not simple.
I’m not treating you like a rube Seth but thank you for spelling out your specific concerns more clearly. I was grasping to figure out what your main point was because I wasn’t thinking the way you were thinking about it.
Now i have a clearer idea what you were getting at.
I agree it should be proportional. I’m just trying to understand the rationale behind our current system.
I’m in Florida, which made my vote count more in one sense (swing state), yet less in another sense (we’re not a sparsely populated state).
But when I was in NJ, my vote only mattered if it was 3rd party. I usually voted 3rd party if it was available for precisely that reason.
It gets even weirder with Gerrymandering. The Supreme Court is discussing this now. Republican controlled legislatures ALWAYS have an unfair advantage towards votes ending up being Republican using gerrymandering.
This not only effects local and state elections but also federal and Presidential.
It’s a hot mess.
To me, I’d:
a) end gerrymandering and make districts mathematical
b) allow for fractional voting
c) i have more ideas but they’re not coming at the moment but something about automatic auditing…