Why The Electoral College Keeps California From Dominating Us All

The post-election fallout continues.

One of the biggest gripes I've been hearing about the election results is that even though Hillary won the popular vote, she lost due to Trump receiving more than the 270 votes in the electoral college needed to become president. I've heard more than a few of our more historically challenged and willfully ignorant youth protest, saying the presidential vote should be based solely on the popular vote. They either don't understand why that would be a bad idea, or they don't care. In my opinion it's most likely both.

Like the two chambers of Congress, the electoral college was set up to prevent large states from entirely dominating the political landscape in the US. I don't know of anyone who would want California deciding who will be our president or setting policy in our country. But that would be the likely outcome if we changed both the electoral college and/or Congress so that counterbalance against the tyranny of the majority were removed.

Our entire nation would look just like California if that were the case – punitive and confiscatory taxes, over-regulation of businesses to the point where can not survive, draconian environmental regulations, bankrupt cities/counties/towns because of of insane fiscal policies, and union domination of the civil service system which would be why the cities/counties/towns were bankrupt. Electricity would be in short supply and very expensive. So would water. Farms would lie fallow and the city elite would rule even those of us in rural areas. We would be living The Hunger Games if the historically challenged and willfully ignorant youth had their way.

However, I doubt it could be changed either quickly or easily considering it would take an amendment to the US Constitution. I doubt you'd find the requisite 35 states to ratify such a destructive and ultimately stupid idea. The rural states would fight like hell to keep such a stupid idea from becoming reality. It could even lead to civil war, should the non-blue states decide they won't have our self-anointed 'betters' deciding how we were going to live even though they know absolutely nothing about us. As Dana Loesch has written, “You can't run a country you've never been to.”

As it is we already see the effects of that in California as the coastal elite make decisions for everyone else, in most cases hurting those who do not live along the coastal corridor of power. They do not see, nor do they care to see the actual effects of their poorly thought out and politically expedient laws, rules, and regulations. They don't have to look the people they have hurt in the eye tell them that “it's for their own good” when their jobs have just been legislated or regulated out of existence. They don't want to know the “little people” because, after all, we don't count.

That's just one small example of why we shouldn't abolish the electoral college.