- Dec 20, 2021
- 6,831
- 18,416
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Arsenal
This is just nonsense fearmongering you've swallow whole.No. You know this is untrue. Let's not do the thing where you pretend not to understand. It should be beneath you, as someone who proclaims to have moral standards.
Trump (and other Republicans) want to put into action a system where he/they can ignore the will of the voters and be President (among other offices) without winning an election.
If presidential elections were by popular vote, Republicans are entirely allowed to win them, by receiving more votes nationwide, which is fitting for a nationwide office. There is nothing stopping them, outside of comparative popularity with voters.
What you would be concerned with is that Republican Presidential candidates would actually have to better represent their entire constituency. This may not bode well for the agendas of the more extreme ideologues and those who simp most for the very wealthy and powerful.
But in any case, since Republicans would have the same opportunity as Democrats to win a single nationwide vote for a single nationwide office, I repeat the question, how would this "end Democracy"?
Or are we arguing for equality of outcome here (both sides get a turn regardless of vote share), instead of equality of opportunity?
I still think the cycles will stay fairly similar if popular voting was introduced. I was just pointing out the tweet that appeared to want the Dems to be in power unchallenged. It may not end Democracy but it's certainly unhealthy.