A thread on representation that no one asked for: It is absurd how little energy there is among the Democratic party for abolishing the EC, since they are always the one that loses. Biden should campaign strongly on it, saying "it ensures YOUR vote matters" or something. BUT

People whining about their representation disappearing as a result are right, too. Not because of conservatism, but because of ag. An abolished EC would prioritize campaign promises to the coasts and potentially land us a candidate that knows nothing about ag (what else is new)

Good ag policy is super important to me as an eater of food, but not to someone who needs to get 150 million votes. The answer here, I think, is not to make the presidency beholden to minority opinions in the midwest. It is to expand representation. Drastically.

Our representation per person is basically the worst in the world. Even if we abolished FPTP, you can only squeeze so much ideology into so few seats.

Look at our Nordic counterparts, who have roughly 1 federal rep per 30k people. Their government is doing decently well (comparatively) representing and achieving the policy goals of their people, probably the best capitalism could ever hope to do.

The US equivalent of this is roughly 10,000 representatives at the federal level. Think of how many different slices of ideology we could get at that level, what coalitions could be formed. It would be so much harder for one voice to prevail, for history to end.

GIve me a book deal pls