you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 25 points 3 years ago (4 children)

If the number of electors was distributed in a way that didn't give disproportional representation to states with very small populations, that would be great. Also, the notion that the US is truly a federation of independent states hasn't been accurate for at least 200 years.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -25 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    It's a bit disproportional for a few states but then again, you can say the votes of people in Wyoming are worth more relatively speaking but it's still just 3 electors in the end. No one will pay much attention to them either way, unlike the more populous states which can swing elections.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    unlike the more populous states which can swing elections.

    You say that like it's a bad thing for people to be in charge rather than arbitrary lines drawn on maps.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago

    It is not just Wyoming, but many states. States like Wyoming and North Dakota get 2-3 times the votes per population as states like California, Florida or Illinois. For states such as New Mexico and Arkansas, the ratio is more like 1.5 times the more populous states. It just doesn't make sense according to how the system is supposed to work.

  • source
  • parent