BLUE
Profile banner
KE
Kevin Elliott
@kjephd.bsky.social
Political theorist studying democracy, ethics, & institutions. Author of Democracy for Busy People (press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/D/bo194847654.html); more at kevinjelliott.net. Generally poasting my way through this thing
3.2k followers837 following7.9k posts
KEkjephd.bsky.social

I've said it before, & I'll say it again: the Electoral College does not advantage small states, it advantages *closely divided* states. The ten smallest states are all basically uncompetitive, while the swing states in 2024 include 4 of the 10 most populous. Only NV is even in the bottom half.

27

CWcaren.bsky.social

The Electoral College was intended to prevent a popular but unqualified demagogue from ever attaining the Presidency. It failed at its one task. It should be abolished. It's pointless. We should have one election that's nationwide.

0
AAavaayers.bsky.social

This seems like a great point. Aren’t they just different forms of advantage, though? Something like: Swing states get all the attention and policy concessions, while small states get more voting power per capita?

3
TPpumpkinpal.bsky.social

I understand what you're saying but I think what people mean is closer to "the fact that so many sparsely populated states are solidly red bakes in an EV bias toward the red side, which turns popular vote landslides into competitive elections"

0
RBhurricanexyz.bsky.social

Well, the Constitution doesn't require current selection methods, but yeah, in practice the malapportionment is pretty mild

0
RSrismith.bsky.social

It still massively advantages small states by giving them an outsized effect on the election. Sure, battleground states get most of the money dumped into them, but that's only possible because there are many small states that put their thumbs on the scales to make the race even slightly competitive.

0
Ttr-murf.bsky.social

The difference is on the margin, and in aggregate, these margins add up to be meaningful. No reason that Wyoming should get one-third the electoral college representation as Colorado with one-tenth the population.

1
MM555tee.bsky.social

Why not both?

“Why not both” meme
0

Texas has ten times as many electoral votes as Montana but thirty times as many people. Isn’t that kind of an advantage for Montanans

1

Yeah the people in small states have to get by with perverse overrepresentation in the Senate. Boo hoo

0
ridder.bsky.social

Perhaps I can't parse your logic. You seem to have defined competitive as an advantage to small states, which is odd. Why would small states want to be "competitive"? I think the advantage small state would be loath to give up is equal representation in federal politics.

0
Profile banner
KE
Kevin Elliott
@kjephd.bsky.social
Political theorist studying democracy, ethics, & institutions. Author of Democracy for Busy People (press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/D/bo194847654.html); more at kevinjelliott.net. Generally poasting my way through this thing
3.2k followers837 following7.9k posts