Let's get rid of the Electoral College

That the majority choice would override the minority choice is unfortunate for the minority but that's how it's supposed to work.

That's hardly the point. It is a matter of whether or not the interests of states with rural populations are fairly represented in a nation which is a union of sovereign states. That was a point i made which you either choose to ignore or failed to understand.

Yes, but as your work at a2k makes clear you have no understanding of the importance of minority rights, of what will always happen when the minority don' have a voice, don't have an avenue to attempt to get their minority views adopted by the majority.

you keep claiming that I am unpopular, but I fail to see where my alleged unpopularity gets in the way of my views being taken into consideration.

A lot of smart people here do talk with me, do find me in spite of your idiotic popularity metric at a2k.

You have designed into a2k an effort to silence the unpopular, which tells be that you fail to understand that the popular consensus opinion NEEDS to be constantly challenged by unpopular opinions...that the majority NEEDS to allow itself to be nit picked by the minority.

It is the only way to keep in touch with changes in the here and now. What was true once, the best option of yesterday, may not fit with current reality. We don't always know what we think we know.

the electoral college ensures that the minority has had a seat at the table during the selection of the administration, has had the chance to say what they want to say to the rest.

It's a fairly simple point, so perhaps you should consider that understanding isn't the issue so much as that I just don't agree with you.

They are, in my opinion, fairly represented as the minority and don't need disproportionate representation.

That's hardly the point. It is a matter of whether or not the interests of states with rural populations are fairly represented in a nation which is a union of sovereign states. That was a point i made which you either choose to ignore or failed to understand.

There's no evidence that the rural minority has any better judgment in these matters than the urban majority.

but that exactly it , the minority should "have a seat at the table" , but imo they should NOT dominate the table .
the majority (the most votes) should still have the final say , shouldn't they ?
hbg

Not during the first six years of the Bush presidency. Congress rubber stamped what ever the president wanted without a care for the wishes of the majority which is why someone like me voted for Obama even though I was not crazy about him. He is better than another republican president.

Like other tyrannies, the tyranny of the majority was at first, and is still vulgarly, held in dread, chiefly as operating through the acts of the public authorities. But reflecting persons perceived that when society is itself the tyrant " society collectively over the separate individuals who compose it " its means of tyrannizing are not restricted to the acts which it may do by the hands of its political functionaries. Society can and does execute its own mandates; and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with which it ought not to meddle, it practices a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression, since, though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself. Protection, therefore, against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough; there needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling, against the tendency of society to impose, by other means than civil penalties, its own ideas and practices as rules of conduct on those who dissent from them; to fetter the development and, if possible, prevent the formation of any individuality not in harmony with its ways, and compel all characters to fashion themselves upon the model of its own. There is a limit to the legitimate interference of collective opinion with individual independence; and to find that limit, and maintain it against encroachment, is as indispensable to a good condition of human affairs as protection against political despotism. " On Liberty, The Library of Liberal Arts edition, p.7.