4 Comments

Wait Minnesota also got a 3 point bonus so the result won’t change for Oregon

Expand full comment

It is literally part of the same compromise that gave us a Senate based on states and a House based on population. States wanted reassurance that their existence as a political unit would continue to be as important as general population. Is it fair that a World Series team that won three games by 10-0, 10-0, and 10-0, but lost 0-1, 0-1, 0-1, and 0-1 loses the championship, even though they outscored their opponents 30-4? The championship is based on games one, not total points scored, and that is a reasonable way to do things. The Presidency is decided on a mixture of points scored and states won. Is it pure democracy? No, but it does retain the importance of states in the United States of America.

Expand full comment

It actually doesn't protect states in any meaningful way. Instead of protecting small states from larger states, it heavily biases towards states that are roughly equal in party representation, leaving out states on both ends of the spectrum. Meanwhile, Texas is trending purple, while California and New York are trending deeper blue. Should Texas ever go blue, which might even happen this year, the Electoral College would basically become a blue lock on the executive branch.

Expand full comment

That's some hilarious revisionist history that leaves out a lot of context!

Expand full comment