The American system of representation was deeply flawed already from the very beginning as it awarded southern, slave owning states the representation of three-fifths of a citizen for each slave they owned - while the slaves themselves where of course not eligible to vote at all.
It was a deeply undemocratic compromise that gave disproportionate power to southern, rural states, and that imbalance has persisted ever since.
Since the end of the Civil War not by this means, but by others and not always effecting the same states in the same way as representation has shifted through the years.
But the point remains that citizens in the more densely populated states have in effect always been given slightly less then one vote, while voters in rural areas have usually been given more then one.
This is obviously not democratic in any way at all, but once the exemption was made for the southern states it was obviously hard to claw it back.
Voters in areas that gain from this system of course defend this imbalance in their favor fiercely - as does their elected representatives.
But that still doesn't change the fact that this obviously violates the basic democratic principle of "one person, one vote" - which the US still falsely claims to uphold.
Here's an old opinion piece from NYT about it, talking about McCain vs. Obama in 2008, so no one thinks people are only mentioning this because Trump won:
The US election system has been seriously messed up from a democratic standpoint for a very long time - and people who study it has been noticing.
But obviously not most ordinary American voters.
0
@Dorsai
The American system of representation was deeply flawed already from the very beginning as it awarded southern, slave owning states the representation of three-fifths of a citizen for each slave they owned - while the slaves themselves where of course not eligible to vote at all.
It was a deeply undemocratic compromise that gave disproportionate power to southern, rural states, and that imbalance has persisted ever since.
Since the end of the Civil War not by this means, but by others and not always effecting the same states in the same way as representation has shifted through the years.
But the point remains that citizens in the more densely populated states have in effect always been given slightly less then one vote, while voters in rural areas have usually been given more then one.
This is obviously not democratic in any way at all, but once the exemption was made for the southern states it was obviously hard to claw it back.
Voters in areas that gain from this system of course defend this imbalance in their favor fiercely - as does their elected representatives.
But that still doesn't change the fact that this obviously violates the basic democratic principle of "one person, one vote" - which the US still falsely claims to uphold.
Here's an old opinion piece from NYT about it, talking about McCain vs. Obama in 2008, so no one thinks people are only mentioning this because Trump won:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/02/opinion/02cowan.html
The US election system has been seriously messed up from a democratic standpoint for a very long time - and people who study it has been noticing.
But obviously not most ordinary American voters.