What is your line in the sand?

Edit: thank you all for your responses. I think it’s important as an American we take your view points seriously. I think of a North Korean living inside of North Korea. They don’t really know how bad it is because that is all hidden from them and they’ve never had anything else. As things get worse for Americans it’s important to have your voices because we will become more and more isolated.

Even the guy who said, “lol.” Some people need that sort of sobering reaction.

  • Lemminary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Not when they have the Electoral College bullshit upending every election in favor of a minority.

      • Lemminary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Well, it takes a bigger portion of voters voting blue just to reach equilibrium, which then results in a few swing states because that’s the stupid system they have. The whole purpose is to dilute the blue vote so Republicans can have a coin flip chance. So whoever wins the swing states instead of the popular vote wins the election. One example is Trump vs Clinton. Technically, Clinton won the popular vote but not the electorate.


        Source

        So, really, it’s not “why are Dems winning elections?” but “why are Reps winning them at all?”

        • Lumbardo@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          In the case of this election. The Republicans won the popular vote, so by your logic they should have won this year anyways.

          Even so, if you look at voting distribution on a US map. Densely populated urban centers vote blue and there are large swathes of land that vote red. Do you propose that the people who live in these densely populated areas should have the power to choose the president every election?

          In my view, the fact that the elections are close and both parties win is evidence that the system works.

          • Lemminary@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 hours ago

            by your logic they should have won this year anyways

            They had a higher probability of winning and they took full advantage of that, yes.

            Do you propose that the people who live in these densely populated areas should have the power to choose the president every election?

            Yes. That’s how it’s done in all other modern democracies that I know of including my own. I don’t understand this idea that population density must result in devaluing one’s vote. It’s punishing the cities for existing. That just because you live in the city your power should be diminished because other people chose to live in Bumbuck, Iowa. Like, what does your residence have to do with anything? It’s a foreign concept to me. Like, you’re not even hurting, you’re just upset that your views aren’t those of the nation.

            Not to mention that’s a curious mindset to have. It implies that people in the city can’t be trusted to decide an election despite their candidates being great. Coincidentally, most of the people in the cities are POC and I find that to be more than a coincidence. I’m inclined to think it’s yet another tool used to disenfranchise Black voters and suppress minorities given the US’s notoriously racist history. We even got threads on this site expressing how that fixation on race makes us foreigners uncomfortable.

            is evidence that the system works

            Yes, it works great in favor of Republicans by tipping the scale. I’m surprised you replied with that given how I just explained that it’s a rigged system and you said, yes it’s wonderful…