This sounds more like a power by a group of people. Why would a state look outside their borders to decide who to vote on, what happens in other states are absolutely none of their business.
@@reasonnottheneed are you serious??? Girls wear skirts all the time and not to just church. You've never heard of the maxi skirt or the cocktail dress??? What about mini skirts???
So by that logic, farmers are the only people who should be able to vote. Well, then and the other people who own land, but I'm not exactly sure what specifically those other people are called, aside from just "land owners".
@@jamesdavis9036 owning land a.k.a. owning property can be used to measure the power and influence of a person, I would even say that is even more valuable than owning the same value in money since the value of a property is much more stable than fiat money.
@@jamesdavis9036 Being that the 16th amendment didn't become law until 1913. The majority of tax payers, were land owners. Few non-land owners paid taxes.
It's entirely inaccurate. The reason that Rhode Island didn't attend the convention was because the government there was populist and was run by the common people. They felt the convention was a scam by the rich to reform the government in a way that would safeguard the interests if the upper class, so they decided to boycott the convention.
I don't see him arguing for or against it here, simply clarifying facts. Nothing about his tone implies either opinions in favor of or against populism. Just that Rhode Island didn't attend the convention because they were populist. Also seemingly agreeing with the original commenter.
As a no provider of shared lunches i reserve the right to shame food owners into silence. Just as the Founding Fathers intended. now back to work bitch, i need cheeretohs for my oprah and Bernie promised me $$$ if i voted for him
@@LeeRothstein since when did Grey become a math professor? He is a full time UA-cam and podcast content creator and before that he was a high school physics teacher.
It's pretty interesting how the ideas of state loyalty have changed over time. A lot of people forget that the original 13 colonies did NOT get along like they do today. In the early days of the US, people felt more loyalty to their state usually compared to the nation, and the states were seen as pretty much separate entities from each other in many regards. That's why we have the Electoral College and House/Senate systems like that; while no one would think to treat each state unequally now, in the early days this was a real concern, so we had this system to change it.
except people do want to treat the states unequally if you dont agree with them they think federal funding should be with heald or if you do agree with them extra federal funding. The extra funding tactic is being used.
"Like they do today..." You mean when lockdown states were hoping for increased deaths for people in Florida for not participating in the national panic?
"But not you, Puerto Rico. Come back when you're a state." Hey, at least Puerto Rico gets a mention. We don't even get brought up unless North Korea threatens us.
I’ve been doing a lot of research on the Gallipoli Campaign because I’m a historian doing a paper on it. I’ve found books that have entire halves of pages dedicated to just footnotes. Grey gets it.
Matt Horkan The problem is that you’re assuming that the NaPoVoCo would fail because it was not in the original intention of the Constitution. However, only three of the SCOTUS judges are originalists, the others are interpretationists. The case could very likely go to through unless some more judges die while the GOP still controls the Senate. The States have near-total freedom to dictate their own election laws, and at least on paper the states with representative or first past the post systems would not be disadvantaged by NaPoVoCo. The key issue is that the Republicans would be hugely disadvantaged by this since they almost never win the popular vote, but the GOP is not constitutionally protected; the US Constitution predates the parties and thus they are considered private citizen associations legally speaking. The Supreme Court cannot overtly act to protect the Republican Party from a Democratic federal government trying to enforce the popular vote unless the GOP can successfully argue it breaks their members’ constitutional rights as private citizens. Which ironically would force the Republicans to argue for the popular vote as a protected right on the state level.
I love how in all these political videos gray makes the Supreme Court some group of gods that just have to deal with the whole country being run by children in suits
He does that because up until late 2020, his side controlled the Supreme Court. Now they don't, so expect his representation of the Supreme Court to change in future
@@kveeder3224 "Even though the Republic of Ireland is no longer a British dominion, it would not be treated as a foreign country for the purposes of British law." To make a long a story short, being an Irish citizen grants you British privileges.
As I've become an adult this phrase went from, "that's a pretty shitty way to think" to, "you can hardly keep your dorm clean, how can I expect you to help me next weekend?"
@This Guy Miko Oh my god. Can you actually stop trying to turn an unbiased and general video of a proposal for a reinterpreted voting system, into a direct political argument against Democrats, illegal immigrants, and even CGP Grey himself? You look ridiculous.
In addition to purchasing the cheapest piece of land he could find, perhaps he could have pointed out that electors will pledge to vote for a particular candidate for president, and be selected by popular vote per-state. Hence, the electors will function more like rubber stamps, and less like intelligent agents who will take the month after election day to evaluate the candidates for president themselves. Thus, the president is chosen by the people, just in a slightly disproportionate way.
@This Guy Miko You are wrong! the threat is not immigrants! the threat is the CCP. The chinese communist party is the worst and we should work to stop them not starving poor people looking for a better life
I love how he has Rhode Island outside when he travels back in time to the founding Father's meeting (Rhode Island was the only state to not participate btw)
There's a reason for that. Yes, it was the last of the 13 colonies to ratify the constitution because it wanted to be assured that the Bill of Rights would become part of the constitution. It made up for it though, because it was the first of the 13 colonies to renounce its allegiance to the british crown.
Congress: Loud and passionate people trying to get their way Senate: Established career politicians protecting their interests President: Frustrated by the lack of power given to the most powerful nan in the world Supreme Court: Nerds who are just fucking done with politicians and their bullshit
Well it's not like they've been doing their job since any of the current justices have been appointed. They've been legislating since FDR, one of the primary problems in our current turmoil IMHO.
@@Asdf-wf6en Sure there is. President appoints Supreme court Judges. If too many of them die in the same term the surpreme court will then be presidents yes-men. It certainly helps if the previuos president didnt appoint any and left more spaces to fill for this president too!
@Anthony Inciarrano I'm not uninformed. I just made a (lame) joke based off the tile and the popularity of the video. P.s. I'll gladly go read a book. Right after I finish reading the title
@@mervinhocsonart1921 He's not really outing it. It's already public information. And Grey himself thinks the Electoral College is crap (he made a previous video explaining why he thinks it's terrible).
@@pingpong1138 Not really, minorities have had their points dismissed for generations. The land owners have historically been rich people who have an obsessive compulsions to control everything.
@@dargondude2375 and minorities deserve their point based on what? Most of them didn't even earn their right to vote and today are too incompetent to lead their own lives. You'll forgive me if I wouldn't trust them to find their way out of a paper bag, let alone make an educated decision when it comes to voting.
I don't think this is explained in any of Grey's electoral college videos: the number of electoral college votes is equal to the number of seats in the house of representatives and the number of seats in the Senate. That's where the "+2" comes from.
@@theelderelk5582 Not sure you know what a shill is. And are you actually surprised that a 6.5 minute video isn't a comprehensive guide to the American electoral system? You'd get more traction pointing out specific inaccuracies, if they exist.
@@jjpaq it doesn't take much to say "those extra two votes are the two senate seats each state gets", rather than making it out to be just randomly added for no reason. It would make a 6.5 min vid into a 6.6 min vid
What do you mean? everyone knows the Democrats have been the ones pushing for it because they control California and New York the 2 most populus states in the nation.
"The Electoral College will no longer be of any concern to us. I have just received word that the NPVIC has bypassed the College permanently. The last remnants of the Old Electorate have been swept away forever." "But that's impossible! How will the nation maintain presidential control without the bureaucracy?" "The People now have direct choice over their president. Fear will keep the local elections in line. Fear of the majority."
I like that each state has something to represent them. Guns for texas, cameras for California and Hollywood inside it, a flower necklace for Hawaii, and buffalo for Montana or Wyoming I can't tell.
I didn't realize how sassy AND unimpressed stick figures could look but when Future Grey tried to talk to the baby states about the EC, Grey's animator managed to make stick figures look both completely unimpressed at something and sassy AT THE SAME TIME lol
Ace Coordinator Mary He doesn’t animate his videos anymore. He does the scripts, research, and everything else. But he has an animator now. I think the first video with the animator was Brexit, Briefly.
I mean yea, that was the whole point of a republic in the first place. Elected officials probably are more informed than the regular person, so we trust them to represent us
I think most people who oppose the electoral college are also frustrated by the fact that with a slight majority for one candidate in a given state, all electoral votes go toward that candidate. This makes the election extremely centralized around random “battleground states.” Also, this makes being a Republican in California or a democrat in Texas a futile prospect-what’s the point of even voting for your preferred non-state preferred candidate?
That’s why I strongly believe that a potentially better reform of the electoral college/vote is to go the way of Maine and Nebraska (if memory serves me right?) and allocate electoral votes proportionally based on the popular vote within the state. For example, let’s say in California the Democrat wins 60% of the vote and the Republican wins 40%. With California’s 55 electoral votes, the Democrat wins 33 electoral votes and the Republican wins 22.
@@King_George_VI This encourages gerrymandering even more and does nothing to solve any of the overarching problems. The Maine/Nebraska system is the exact same as the current state-wide winner takes all system but on a smaller scale. You're still going to have votes thrown out and states that dont matter at all politically, or perhaps just districts that don't matter politically. Instead of making everyone matter, or even just a few states matter, you're moving that to districts and consolidating electoral power within arbitrarily defined areas. Who cares about the folks in Ohio as a whole then? They'd only care about Ohio's battleground districts. Who would care about anyone in Alabama or Mississippi? They have no battleground districts at all. Maryland is a solid 10 Dem votes even with this system, despite percents not being 100-0. Maine/Nebraska solution is not the solution to our problem, and this is coming from someone who lives within one of these battleground districts (KY-06). Tl:dr; The maine/nebraska system on a large scale does nothing to fix the issue and even exacerbates it in certain areas
You forget that having it be a popular vote makes the Californian and Texan pointlessness problem even worse. its essentially the winner take all system everyone complains about when it comes to the electoral college. Ex: Candidate 1 gets 30% of vote. Candidate 2 gets 20% of vote. Candidate 3 gets 17% of vote. Candidates 4-7 get a collective 33% of the vote = Candidate 1 gets all the electoral college votes for that state. A state in which 70% of the state voted against the candidate and could all theoretically be of the other party. Look guy, if you want a system in which the smaller states get the proportional amount of power in government (meaning irrelevance) then abolish the republic and become an empire. Who knows you may even bring about a new era of peace and progress like Rome did. I'd be up for that but I highly doubt you would, your call. : p
@@darken2417 You realize there is also something called ranked choice voting correct? And popular vote would mean the state issue is not an issue anymore, so I have no idea what you're even talking about now.
1:30 I just noticed that in the room are only 12 stares, with Rhode Island standing outside the window staring angrily, because Rhode Island was against the constitution and was the last to ratify it. Grey just goes crazy with background details like this.
I have a feeling the Electoral College Flag would be one of those peeing Calvin and Hobbes cartoons except Calvin would be peeing on an American voter while giving the Statue of Liberty the finger.
Just as an update for the Nevadans out there: This plan passed in Nevada's state congress but was ultimately vetoed by Governor Steve Sisolak. Just thought I'd let you know.
@@u2befake149 not one of those groups is mentally sound enough on average to deserve the privilege of voting and the founding fathers understood that. you should seriously consider taking your politically correct glasses off...
@@voltagedrop5899 So obviously you're one of the people who believe that women and nonwhites are like, neurologically inferior. There's no point arguing with you on this, given literally all of the science disagrees with you and you won't listen no matter what. But, I do have a question. Are you like, a bonehead? Maybe one of those conspiracy theorist types like Alex Jones? Perhaps a "Western Civilization" lover? Or even are you just a full-on raging neo-Nazi? I'm getting important statistics here about the reactionary lunatics who deny science here and every hyper-conservative with the intellectual maturity of a toddler is a vital data point. Please respond immediately
Copy and paste of my reply to another comment: There is a certain idea for why that was. Basically, the reason why only landed citizens were allowed to vote/voice opinions is because they are the ones who were deemed to have a vested interest in the nation as a whole. Anyone without land would have no strings holding them back and leaving to a different nation after they have voted for a law/leader that would affect the nation far after they left. This is why certain people in the 1700s that live in areas where voting was more open really disliked college students for, since the vast majority of them would leave after influencing the politics of the place that would affect the place after they left. Long story short, people who own land, stay where their land is, and therefor can be trusted to look after the interests of the nation, as anything that is good for the nation, is good for their land.
It would actually be wilder than that. There won't just be US supreme court cases, there will be court cases in EVERY SINGLE one of the participating states because many of those state constitutions say troubling things like "the will of the people" (of that state). NPV goes directly against that and ignored the will fo the people of that state to, instead, bow to the will of NY and CA.
@@mantissaga4795 Why not just use direct ? That way the president is chosen by the people, and Conservatives will not be able to complain about CA and NY having to much influence, or Liberals about samaller states having too much influence compared to their population.
FRED ALFREDO this isn’t a concern to me ( a conservative ), of the five most populous states three of the five voted Republican, this is a good thing for the Republicans.
FRED ALFREDO this isn’t a concern to me ( a conservative ), of the five most populous states three of the five voted Republican, this is a good thing for the Republicans.
@@itchyscientist0576 I really don't care about Conservatives or Liberals, I just don't want candidates to only care (or at least pretend to care) abou a hand full of States, if the US had a direct vote every vote would count, not only swing States. Democrats would pay more attention to rural voters, and Republicans would pay more attention to the Big cities , not everyone is a farmer or a coal miner, and not everyone is a city Starbucks hipster.
1:25 Noticed that Rhode Island is standing outside the room, looking pissed- because Rhode Island initially boycotted the drawing-up of the Constitution, and was the last of the thirteen states to sign it!
The thing is, the constitution was thee 'oops we messed up last time let's try to fix this' document. We used to go by the Articles of Confederation where the states were about as united as the EU is.
Less so. The constitution was basically the EU + some military and taxation. States still had their own militias and the federal government could only tax interstate trade.
@@eifbkcn South Koreas independence IS also illegal, and most of the countries history was of coups against whats now North Korea. If the Victor doesn't get the spoils, then we can at least be sure they don't go to the former empire
@@eifbkcn Brittain was barely legal according too global law of the old world, with the old French mostly determining their legitimacy and what land they have the right to occupy. Republics recognize no overlords, so Brittain got big and the French got small. And then we start spreading constitional democracy, which allowed each Republic to recognize each other's sovereignty and then to actually work together without having to worry about invasion from the others
Really depends on which time. Rome had a history of nearly 400 years _before_ becoming an empire. Throughout it's history it went from plutocratic oligarchy, to stratified democracy, to plutocratic democracy, to elected oligarchy, to not-so-elected stratified oligarchy, then for a while lots of people claimed to be in charge but no-one really was, then Ceasar said "you know what, military dictatorship sounds like a good idea". Of all those systems, I'd say the stratified democracy had _some_ similarities to the USA, such as regions appointing who is first-among-equals in the senate, the assembly being elected by the people, and the justice system not caring at all, but there are also significant differences, such as the senate being elected only by citizens of Rome (the city) itself, the votes being cast by-family rather than by-person, and votes being weighted by how much money the family had, and, of course, the first-among-equals of the senate was so unimportant that nobody cared who it was until Ceaser showed up and said "Military Dictatorship!"
@@jebblottin92 The implication was that if you owned land you had a vested interest in what happened to it. You weren't just a hired hand that could get up and move on down the road to some other farm or business. You were part of the long term fabric of the community, you paid property taxes for the upkeep of that community (before an income tax), and so you were a person that was allotted the right to weigh in on what happened to that community and how it was run. Contrasting that to those who would invite foreigners into the country who have no vested interest other than free benefits, and giving them the right to vote. How do you think that would turn out?
...and begging the union for federal money to clean up the mess they caused when they actively encouraged terrorists to burn, loot, pillage, rape, and murder.
@@archangel4670 Are you out of your mind?? don't let them know that you know. The government doesn't want anyone to know that it's just an engram implanted into people's minds- -gets dragged off-
"In order to ensure our security and continuing stability, the Republic will be reorganized into the first Galactic Empire for a safe and secure society."
=The Current NaPoVoInterCo Status= Number of states that adopted: 15 + D.C. Number of states that are pending: 3 (Michigan, Pennsylvania & Texas) Number of votes in the Electoral College: 195 Percentage of votes in the Electoral College: 72.2% Number of votes in the Electoral College IF the pending adoptions are passed: 269 Percentage of votes in the Electoral College IF the pending adoptions are passed: 99,7% (approximately)
If the Supreme Court rules against California, please feel free to lodge an official complaint that your name is not on the Ballot... assuming you are native born and over 35 years of age. Lets see if we can force more choices then 2!
@@IlIlllIllIlIIIll I mean if there is ranked choice and the person with the most second choices wins, would the states have to consider that to be the most popular candidate and direct their votes to it?
Past State: "Do you even LIVE in america?" CGPGrey: "no I live in the UK..." Past State: "He's a red coat!" CGP Grey: "No wait, the countries are totally cool now-" *Shove through time portal*
I can think of better places to flush communist bullsheet down. Thank the founding fathers for their infallible wisdom to have created this check. By the way do you think Op (e.g. CPG) missed out on his own joke, about the United States NOT being a Democracy? (i.e. Mob mentality rules?) 'Cause this is what's he pleading for. The fuxxking hypotwit. One meerly has to wonder if the poles reversed, and dear old Killary had been appointed as the President. Under these conditions. Do you suppose CPG would still have made this Video, and or the tiresome arguments theirin?
@@Ichijoe2112 well considering he was against the electoral college even before the 2016 election, he probably would still be making this video. Although, would you still like the college if Hillary would have been elected?
So fun note about the "do you even own land" thing is that when the constitution was written really the only major tax was property tax, no income tax yet, so if you didn't own land you didn't really pay taxes and thus you shouldn't get a vote since the founders were all about the whole taxation going with representation thing. Now it's not relevant because we have so many new taxes.
Prefaced with, "i dont think they should but" if Taxation is the requisite for representation (and why not, it was the basis for the founding of the country after all), then anyone that has bought something off the shelf in America (and thus paid some form of Tax) should get a vote of some kind? Just a thought.
Mark Davison I would say it is because that random person buying a thing in America was not forced to buy it from America. The issue that came from The Colonies being taxed by the British is that the British forced them to buy the things that were taxed only from Britain thereby forcing The Colonies to pay a tax that they may not have had to pay had they been allowed to look elsewhere. That is just my two cents on the matter.
So fun video clip about the "do you even own land" thing is that it's now on my channel and it's a loopable video (please give me watchtime kthx) ua-cam.com/video/9QPSOy4g_cg/v-deo.html
I know they favored "no taxation without representation," but not getting a vote without paying taxes is "no representation without taxation." Were the founders also about that? There's a big difference between "no rum without water," and "no water without rum."
It's really not sneaky, it been talked about for some time across the board. It's likely that it will gain little traction. But it will level the playing field, Odessa Texas won't be able to decide what flavours of Juul are regulated in Rochester New York. That's about all this will accomplish because it doesn't really establish that states will actually change the way they vote.
@@DeepFriedBeans23819 if there's a state regulating things going on in another state, then we've got bigger problems than the electoral college. The Constitution establishes various non interference policies, to prevent that. And I'm sure it's an example that you brought up, but, nonetheless, I know it can occur between states.
At least for Texas, she gets to be different because she was her own nation at one point. If you live in Britain be sure to visit the old Texan embassy.
"Do you even own land?" "Yes, glad you asked. I actually own several NFTs for regions of the moon, Mars and asteroids orbiting our solar system." "A... what?" "NFTs; non-fungible tokens. It's basically a way to plant a flag on the thing you want, but without ever actually going there, and without anybody recognizing your ownership." "Sooo... you don't, own land... ?" "No :("
There is a certain idea for why that was. Basically, the reason why only landed citizens were allowed to vote/voice opinions is because they are the ones who were deemed to have a vested interest in the nation as a whole. Anyone without land would have no strings holding them back and leaving to a different nation after they have voted for a law/leader that would affect the nation far after they left. This is why certain people in the 1700s that live in areas where voting was more open really disliked college students for, since the vast majority of them would leave after influencing the politics of the place that would affect the place after they left. Long story short, people who own land, stay where their land is, and therefor can be trusted to look after the interests of the nation, as anything that is good for the nation, is good for their land.
@@bilguunsuvargakhairkhan5533 Here comes the insidious part: remember the whole "women can vote" thing? It was all just a facade. The thing is, not only owners of land, but also owners of businesses could vote, which means that only people with a stake in the country's economy could vote. But then feminism comes along, sneakily pushing not for women's rights, but for the fact that everyone, not just people who have an actual interest in voting and a stake in the economy, to vote. If I was given the ability to revoke that change and go back to how it was, I would do so in a heartbeat, even though I wouldn't be able to vote either. Skip a couple decades and now the US is basically allowing illegal aliens and the dead to vote democrat, and emigration from blue states like commiefornia is turning the red states purple. The current democracy in the states is a farce, Trump wasn't supposed to win in 2016, and dems and big corporations have been doing everything in their power to never allow another non-dem candidate to win. TLDR everything is fucked and you are too late to stop any of it.
@@guysome7469 Well now I want to clarify that by no means do I endorse xenophobia, conspiracy theories, racism, sexism, and classism by my comment, I was simply trying to explain the reasoning people in the 1700s used to create their voter rights laws.
As a Rhode Island I find it as my job to inform you. Rhode Island did not want to sign due to the fact that they would lose power that they have gained from the Constitution (that didn’t work) and because of they being so small, they would not have as much power as the other states.
There might be more to this constitutionally, but it seems pretty clearly legit: "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors" Like they could be having a hot dog eating contest to determine who gets to pick elector appointment
@@tz8785 many do, but a majority just go with retired members of the winning party by tradition and political ease. It’s so that there’s less chance of faithless electors (who also are supposed to be part of this system too, but kind of aren’t these days and might receive some legal and party spite even when there’s no laws against them, but that basically means independents and third parties rarely if ever get electors even in proportional situations and makes an independent win quite unlikely).
Hell. A direct democracy would be a nightmare. No politician would have any incentive to care about rural areas and you have farmers strikes every couple of years due to their worsening situation.
@@dariendark7263 The farmers are already being bent over and taken by the large Agri business. You realize most farmland is corporate owned now and it's continuing to get a larger share of that industry yearly? Nearly all the money Trump allocated to farmers due the disaster of a trade war he started went to large Agri companies, not mom and pop farmers like we (Americans) still believe run said farms. Almost all sectors of the economy are being sucked up and centralized into 2 or 3 companies, farmers included.
1. Import easily manipulated non-Americans, both legally and illegally 2. Control the MSM 3. Oops we forgot the Social media in 2016. Fixed: Control the Social media 4. Tell the people who to vote for. Elections are now selections
@@TheBelrick Illegal immigrants can't vote for president. People with green cards can't vote for president. You MUST be a citizen. Your plan would immediately fail.
@@jorceshaman No voter ID required. Good job on ignoring that you DNC hack. "In a stunning ruling, the Supreme Court of the United States struck down an Arizona law requiring voters to present citizenship proof to register in state and federal elections."
@@jorceshaman also why do you ignore the fact that the MSM is a arm of the DNC? That Social media are banning and censoring conservative political groups. never left wing Oh and lest we forget. Obamas IRS controversy.
@@TheBelrick What a bizarre you live in that you need to import non-americans to control the vote like most of the population isn't already lobotomized to vote like they tell them to in function of their owen personal fears and biases. Fox news has been doing this for decades. (www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/9/8/16263710/fox-news-presidential-vote-study )
People really like direct democracy until they realize that centrism has gravity and voting in a plurality voting system means your vote is a coin toss.
Uh thats not 1776 pal. Thats the Constitutional convention in 1787. Thats where they singed the constitution. 1776 was where they signed the Declaration of independence.
Yay, capitalism...am i right?😂😂😂 This just proves what dumbassery most "mayflower" US immigrants was. They literally runs from royal servitude and capitalist oppression in the old world just to esthablished the same nasty system in america
@@nurlindafsihotang49 Uhh what that makes no sense seeing as still lots of nations un Europe still used feudalism like Russia and other great powers. And capitalism has been the best amd most useful economic system for over 400 years. What would you pefer? Socialism?
@@nurlindafsihotang49 except the prevailing economic system for european nations that were colonizing america at the time wasnt capitalism it was mercantilism
The real problem is the number of House Reps was set at 435 back in 1910 when our population was only about 90 million. Thus, about 1 House Rep for every 200,000 people. Today we are a population of 328 million, and 435 House Reps results in 1 House Rep for every 754,000 people. (Much eroding everyone's "enfranchisement" in Congress and the EC!) If we had the same proportion today, (i to 200k) we would have about 1640 House Reps. Congress would be changed radically and so would the Electoral College, since there would be 1691 EC Electors! And it would all be perfectly constitutional! (I mean, the House of Representative is supposed to represent THE POPULTION OF TODAY! Right? And NOT the population of 1910!)
My question though is... what happens if members of this plan don't follow through? Like they have enough members for it to go into effect and during the next election some members don't follow the nationwide majority? Is there a consequence? Because if it is true that states can cast their votes however they like, it sounds like there wouldn't be and if there isn't any consequence for not following through, then I see little chance of this plan actually working out in the end. Or, at least, not being a long term solution.
@@GamerFromJump How would it become mexico del norte? Does mexico sponsor reigime change in the United States? Do they conquer it through military conquest? Does Mexico become the senate?
@@MaxJey2 south Canada sounds more realistic as Mexico has way less power/Influence even compared to Canada. However I think since America has so many guns that even they would have a hard time taking over that it would just be a similar situation as the Civil war join one side of America as you would have America A and America B
If you want to give any branch of government more or less power, just hire an electrician to change the number of outlets in the Oval Office, Supreme Court, or Congress.
Lol you win the internet with this comment today.. ....... One could also (secretly) install remote power outlet controllers hidden inside the drywall/lathe & plaster - to control how and when branches of Government have access to power. Would be fun to watch. Now why dies that sound familiar?🤔
The issue with this idea though is that it takes manybstates to equal the votinf power of 1 state... California has 50 votes where as the smallest states only have 3... You would need nearly all the bread basket to equal 1 california. Once you tack on Illinois (bevause chicago single handedly controls the whole state), and NY, you pretty much have a HUGE lead right there.
@@NecroAsphyxia But that's precisely because there are SO many people living in California. Why should those people be punished and told their opinion matters less just because they live in a populous area? Land doesn't have rights, people do - and people deserve the right to a fair vote.
@@NecroAsphyxia But don't you see how broken it is? Right now small states that shouldn't deserve 1 whole rep get a whole rep anyway, while CA is undercut +10 reps. & as small states gets smaller & large states get larger that script will flip & CA will have too many votes absolutely anyway. Along w/ this meta initiative we need to triple the # of reps so as for 1 to reasonably keep their finger on the pulse of the ppl; & in turn the ppl keep the official to account. We also need to end insistence on 1st past the post vote tally. I say Borda count for high office & STV for reps.
@@NecroAsphyxia Right now small rural states are cut loose by their senators & presidential candidates alike. A popular vote will make them try harder; 2016 was decided by ~70K in just a couple counties. Majority rule>minority rule>despotic unaccountable rule.
@Ian Jones Maybe I'm not being clear enough? Candidates don't give a shit about states big or small right now! They go to the same 5 counties in the same 5 swing states 11/10. That is undemocratic, penultimate only to an actual unchecked despot. The top 20 cities being visited is much more democratic than visiting 0. Pls don't be a single issue voter that cuts off his nose to spite his face. I don't mean disrespect; IDK how else to describe it?
The Electoral College probably made sense when counting votes and reporting those counts could take months. Now (barring idiocy) it takes days to a couple of weeks to count, and moments to report the results. - And for anyone who thinks the Electoral College is a genius idea, remember it came from the same minds that said Governors should select their state's senators. Oh, and that women, non-land owners, and humans who were property didn't get a vote.
An update, sort of: ua-cam.com/video/COmW6r23zas/v-deo.html
Hey Grey, Coke or Pepsi?
wow its nothing
Umm revisiting this to go back to where it made me revisit this... Whatte loop
@@witr Hey! I like his videos
This sounds more like a power by a group of people. Why would a state look outside their borders to decide who to vote on, what happens in other states are absolutely none of their business.
Things To Do Before Going Back In Time:
-Consider paradoxical consequences of going back in time
-Buying land
-lunch
How does _before going back in time_ even work?
That's why time traveling must be outlawed, grammar is complicated enough as is.
@@jakx2ob He said before GOING back in time, not ARRIVING back in time
Bring a smartphone to get a pic of yourself drinking with the founding fathers
Don't forget being a white man. If you don't do that step, then depending on where and when you land, things could get dicey fast.
- get the smallpox vaccine
- don't be black
I feel like grey only represents everyone as a female stock figure so he can draw their icons of whatever they are representing on their skirts
"If it's good enough for sports it's good enough for skorts!"
Well, if you notice, all naval ships are referred to as female, and likewise, states tend to be represented as female as well, hence the skirts.
What others have said before about countries using pronouns, but you don't think they aren't adorable? Those little pig tails!
Tangential thought, does anybody still wear skirts these days? I'm not sure if I've ever seen someone wear one outside of a play or a wedding.
@@reasonnottheneed are you serious??? Girls wear skirts all the time and not to just church. You've never heard of the maxi skirt or the cocktail dress??? What about mini skirts???
"do you even own land, bro?"
Never felt so owned by people hundreds of years ago
Same
So by that logic, farmers are the only people who should be able to vote.
Well, then and the other people who own land, but I'm not exactly sure what specifically those other people are called, aside from just "land owners".
@@jamesdavis9036 owning land a.k.a. owning property can be used to measure the power and influence of a person, I would even say that is even more valuable than owning the same value in money since the value of a property is much more stable than fiat money.
@@jamesdavis9036 Being that the 16th amendment didn't become law until 1913. The majority of tax payers, were land owners. Few non-land owners paid taxes.
Really!?! Taxes, so called ownership of property, human rights "non whites", privacy laws, Dude you been owned since way before you was born.
I like how even Rhode Island laughed at CGP Grey’s concern for the people from outside of the convention.
It's entirely inaccurate. The reason that Rhode Island didn't attend the convention was because the government there was populist and was run by the common people. They felt the convention was a scam by the rich to reform the government in a way that would safeguard the interests if the upper class, so they decided to boycott the convention.
@@eifbkcn Wait, are you arguing _for_ populism?
@@macaroon_nuggets8008 Sounds like it 👍
@@macaroon_nuggets8008 Looks like he doesn't know what the term populism represents.
I don't see him arguing for or against it here, simply clarifying facts. Nothing about his tone implies either opinions in favor of or against populism. Just that Rhode Island didn't attend the convention because they were populist. Also seemingly agreeing with the original commenter.
As a land owning citizen, I reserve the right to win any argument by shaming the landless into silence, just as the Founding Fathers intended
neh, sir I also have land and I challenge you to a duel of wits.
Ah yes mob rule. Thanks James Woods
Wits? Nah, don't need those.
Which of you has more LAND? That's the important question.
As a no provider of shared lunches i reserve the right to shame food owners into silence. Just as the Founding Fathers intended. now back to work bitch, i need cheeretohs for my oprah and Bernie promised me $$$ if i voted for him
Do you own that land or does the bank? There is a difference. For most people its the latter.
The only difference between a fortress and a prison is who controls the gates and which way the guns are pointing.
Walking Dead seasons 3-4 agree
Im 14 and this is deep
We live in.
Yeah and the fact that most fortresses are not, in fact, prisons.
@@Timon-IrishFolk whereas most prisons are, in fact, fortresses.
Hang on a second, Grey doesn’t own land?
Unsubscribed.
At least not at the times of the Founding Fathers.
Peasants!
Grey, an American, lives in the UK where he's a university math prof.
filthy peasant
@@LeeRothstein since when did Grey become a math professor?
He is a full time UA-cam and podcast content creator and before that he was a high school physics teacher.
It's pretty interesting how the ideas of state loyalty have changed over time. A lot of people forget that the original 13 colonies did NOT get along like they do today. In the early days of the US, people felt more loyalty to their state usually compared to the nation, and the states were seen as pretty much separate entities from each other in many regards. That's why we have the Electoral College and House/Senate systems like that; while no one would think to treat each state unequally now, in the early days this was a real concern, so we had this system to change it.
except people do want to treat the states unequally if you dont agree with them they think federal funding should be with heald or if you do agree with them extra federal funding.
The extra funding tactic is being used.
"Like they do today..." You mean when lockdown states were hoping for increased deaths for people in Florida for not participating in the national panic?
"But not you, Puerto Rico. Come back when you're a state."
Hey, at least Puerto Rico gets a mention. We don't even get brought up unless North Korea threatens us.
Guam?
@@robertalvarez1240 Bingo
Eh, not our problem, they don’t want to become a state, so thats fine with us.
"Tell us about it." - American Samoa
“Amen”- US Virgin Islands 🇻🇮
Video: 6½ minutes
Footnote: 43 minutes
This is why we keep coming back.
43 minutes?
True. I've been going back to his older videos and reading the footnotes. It's so much! But I'm learning a lot more than with just the video.
I only happened to see the footnote in my recommended
I’ve been doing a lot of research on the Gallipoli Campaign because I’m a historian doing a paper on it. I’ve found books that have entire halves of pages dedicated to just footnotes. Grey gets it.
I love how the Supreme Court looks so bored with the states BS.
That's mostly because it is
@Brayan Velez why ?
@Matt Horkan Tell the Democrat Party. And the Republican Party as well.
Yes, that is the joke.
Matt Horkan
The problem is that you’re assuming that the NaPoVoCo would fail because it was not in the original intention of the Constitution. However, only three of the SCOTUS judges are originalists, the others are interpretationists. The case could very likely go to through unless some more judges die while the GOP still controls the Senate. The States have near-total freedom to dictate their own election laws, and at least on paper the states with representative or first past the post systems would not be disadvantaged by NaPoVoCo. The key issue is that the Republicans would be hugely disadvantaged by this since they almost never win the popular vote, but the GOP is not constitutionally protected; the US Constitution predates the parties and thus they are considered private citizen associations legally speaking. The Supreme Court cannot overtly act to protect the Republican Party from a Democratic federal government trying to enforce the popular vote unless the GOP can successfully argue it breaks their members’ constitutional rights as private citizens. Which ironically would force the Republicans to argue for the popular vote as a protected right on the state level.
I love how in all these political videos gray makes the Supreme Court some group of gods that just have to deal with the whole country being run by children in suits
I mean... it’s not entirely inaccurate
and that's really fricking sad
He does that because up until late 2020, his side controlled the Supreme Court. Now they don't, so expect his representation of the Supreme Court to change in future
no he does that because funny
@@MrBenMcLean you do realize that CGP is British, and thus does not have a side in the USA elections, right?
Official petition to change the official term “top secret” to “top sneaky”
top sneakret
Top Stalin
Nancy Pelosi (D-Globalist, bureaucrat for life). Ämerican people cannot be trusted with the election.
@@katowo6521 . . .it's not. That's the joke.
They pulled a sneaky on the Electoral College.
"Do you even own land" they say to the person that steeped out of a glowing portal from the future.
Not to mention CGP Grey is British.
@@kveeder3224 Irish.
(He's actually American, but he does have Irish citizenship)
@ I thought he lived in London?
@@kveeder3224 He does indeed live in London. But he's Irish-American
@@kveeder3224 "Even though the Republic of Ireland is no longer a British dominion, it would not be treated as a foreign country for the purposes of British law."
To make a long a story short, being an Irish citizen grants you British privileges.
“The sneaky plan”
*295k views*
And counting.
Well, he gave them the information, let’s see if they can do something about it
0.09% of the USA population
Grey is a confirmed narc. He did the same with the law we don't talk about
640k views.... your comment shows as "3 hours ago".
If you go back to the past and the founding fathers ask if you even own land, always say yes. They literally have no way of verifying it
Everything here is controlled by the crown. No you do not own your property. Nor do you own your own life
Or scare them by pulling out a phone Even though you don't have connection you will have power. scare them...
This is cool, but I can’t trust you since you don’t own land
he's a robot
As I've become an adult this phrase went from, "that's a pretty shitty way to think" to, "you can hardly keep your dorm clean, how can I expect you to help me next weekend?"
@This Guy Miko Oh my god. Can you actually stop trying to turn an unbiased and general video of a proposal for a reinterpreted voting system, into a direct political argument against Democrats, illegal immigrants, and even CGP Grey himself? You look ridiculous.
In addition to purchasing the cheapest piece of land he could find, perhaps he could have pointed out that electors will pledge to vote for a particular candidate for president, and be selected by popular vote per-state. Hence, the electors will function more like rubber stamps, and less like intelligent agents who will take the month after election day to evaluate the candidates for president themselves. Thus, the president is chosen by the people, just in a slightly disproportionate way.
@This Guy Miko You are wrong! the threat is not immigrants! the threat is the CCP. The chinese communist party is the worst and we should work to stop them not starving poor people looking for a better life
I love how he has Rhode Island outside when he travels back in time to the founding Father's meeting (Rhode Island was the only state to not participate btw)
Omg, I didn't notice that!! He puts in so many clever things
Good catch!
There's a reason for that. Yes, it was the last of the 13 colonies to ratify the constitution because it wanted to be assured that the Bill of Rights would become part of the constitution. It made up for it though, because it was the first of the 13 colonies to renounce its allegiance to the british crown.
@@onekerri1 "Made Up For It" - I still think they'd all be better off under our tea-drinking fist :P
@@jcskyknight2222 Found The Spiffing Brit's alt account!
I love how *done* the Supreme Court is
Congress: Loud and passionate people trying to get their way
Senate: Established career politicians protecting their interests
President: Frustrated by the lack of power given to the most powerful nan in the world
Supreme Court: Nerds who are just fucking done with politicians and their bullshit
Thomas Willard Senate is part of Congress tho, do you mean House of Representatives?
Well it's not like they've been doing their job since any of the current justices have been appointed. They've been legislating since FDR, one of the primary problems in our current turmoil IMHO.
I wonder if there is a way to subvert the Supreme Court too.
@@Asdf-wf6en Sure there is. President appoints Supreme court Judges. If too many of them die in the same term the surpreme court will then be presidents yes-men. It certainly helps if the previuos president didnt appoint any and left more spaces to fill for this president too!
This inspired me to make the Electoral College my Political Science final paper. Wound up being ~19 pages. Fascinating video.
That's awesome dude and I'm glad you found something that interested you so much!!!
"The sneaky plan"
Top 10 on trending
No so sneaky anymore, eh Grey
As informative (and humorous) this video was, I wonder how many people would be angry at Grey for "outing" their master plan. :P
5th now
@@vanguard616 so sneaky
@Anthony Inciarrano I'm not uninformed. I just made a (lame) joke based off the tile and the popularity of the video.
P.s. I'll gladly go read a book. Right after I finish reading the title
@@mervinhocsonart1921 He's not really outing it. It's already public information. And Grey himself thinks the Electoral College is crap (he made a previous video explaining why he thinks it's terrible).
everytime in an argument from now on:
"your point and argument sucks because you dont even own land"
Well, I actually do own land so HA! Q.E.D.
"I own land so my point is more valid" is like saying "I'm a specific minority so my point is more valid" today.
@@pingpong1138 but it is more valid, would you listen to a pilot or someone who write about being a pilot?
@@pingpong1138 Not really, minorities have had their points dismissed for generations. The land owners have historically been rich people who have an obsessive compulsions to control everything.
@@dargondude2375 and minorities deserve their point based on what? Most of them didn't even earn their right to vote and today are too incompetent to lead their own lives. You'll forgive me if I wouldn't trust them to find their way out of a paper bag, let alone make an educated decision when it comes to voting.
As a Texan, I love how the Texas character gets guns and a hat
As it should be
Agreed. As it should be.
that's what Texas is
Definitely as it should be
And I am a fan, as a New Yorker, of how much of an asshole constitutional convention NY is. We are all assholes ;)
I don't think this is explained in any of Grey's electoral college videos: the number of electoral college votes is equal to the number of seats in the house of representatives and the number of seats in the Senate. That's where the "+2" comes from.
He's a shill pushing partial information
@@theelderelk5582 Not sure you know what a shill is. And are you actually surprised that a 6.5 minute video isn't a comprehensive guide to the American electoral system?
You'd get more traction pointing out specific inaccuracies, if they exist.
@@jjpaq it doesn't take much to say "those extra two votes are the two senate seats each state gets", rather than making it out to be just randomly added for no reason.
It would make a 6.5 min vid into a 6.6 min vid
@@theelderelk5582 That's a critique (and a fair one), but not an inaccuracy per se. Doesn't make him a "shill", either.
@@theelderelk5582 then go make your own video
you saved yourself with those yellow and orange party colors
because it doesnt matter. the whole thing is now a silly mess anyhow. Anyone looking forward to 'American Civil War: Part 2'?
He always uses yellow and orange for party colors. He has been doing that for a long time now
@@professorfukyu744 It will be a very unique way of turning 200 million humans into paste.
Bryce Shinohara fucking yellowtards #orangepride
What do you mean? everyone knows the Democrats have been the ones pushing for it because they control California and New York the 2 most populus states in the nation.
*Point 4 gets satisfied*
"Execute Order 66"
It will be done my Lord
Article 1, section 10: *Uno reverse card*
i think this is the new revolution use the power of the law against itself
Daniel my Lord is that legal?
"The Electoral College will no longer be of any concern to us. I have just received word that the NPVIC has bypassed the College permanently. The last remnants of the Old Electorate have been swept away forever."
"But that's impossible! How will the nation maintain presidential control without the bureaucracy?"
"The People now have direct choice over their president. Fear will keep the local elections in line. Fear of the majority."
"Do you own land?", I will use this to win every argument from now on.
It's like the old Eddie Izzard sketch "The Cunning Use of Flags"
Hey, I can win this argument.
You get even more points if you also own slaves.
Are you shitting me? i can make my own land.
But if they DO own land you’re knackered.
I like that each state has something to represent them. Guns for texas, cameras for California and Hollywood inside it, a flower necklace for Hawaii, and buffalo for Montana or Wyoming I can't tell.
"Hollywood inside California"
Wyoming
Buffalo for Oklahoma maybe ?
Lei for Hawaii, not a necklace
@@AliAlslaman No, it's definitely Wyoming.
That's just directly voting for the president with extra steps.
Because it's way easier to get this done than to actually make it so the country directly votes for the president.
Fernando Bessa Damn I was going to say this
At which people may have started caring who are we voting for our state representatives thanks to Democrats going bonkers.
Yes... That the whole point, hence it being a "back door". This was explained in cartoon form in the simplest possible way just now, come on man.
Yes but also no
It ultimately invalidates the electoral college by adding this amendment to the Constitution
I didn't realize how sassy AND unimpressed stick figures could look but when Future Grey tried to talk to the baby states about the EC, Grey's animator managed to make stick figures look both completely unimpressed at something and sassy AT THE SAME TIME lol
What part of the video you talking about?
Ace Coordinator Mary
He doesn’t animate his videos anymore. He does the scripts, research, and everything else. But he has an animator now. I think the first video with the animator was Brexit, Briefly.
Welcome to CGP Grey! 😃 Well educated, fun, and pretty fair in his presentations. 👍
Didn't he want to hire an animator once for his videos...? Im sure he put up a contest once for that. Did anyone ever win that?
States: "The people? You can't trust the people!"
That aged well
I mean yea, that was the whole point of a republic in the first place. Elected officials probably are more informed than the regular person, so we trust them to represent us
ahem ahem Karens ahem.
@@Poppipower Not like we can trust them either...
Samuel Wang shit you right
Problem is that "college electors" is included in "people".
I like how the Supreme Court can snap and summon anyone they Desire.
?
And the funny thing is, they actually *can* .
@@jerycaryy4342 look closely at when the supreme court summons anybody
/summon
@@nagihan8114 /tp
When I was a kid I thought the electoral college was a school teaching people how to vote
public education FAIL.
Believe or not...there actually are people who think this :D
Same
Sounds like a good idea.
Nope there a group of people who actually get to vote, while you're silly little vote means nothing
"Do you even own land?"
"No"
-"well, what state do you live in??"
-"...England"
-"gtfo"
Doesn't Grey live in Ireland?
This is purely undemocratic
USA more like Undemocratic States Of America
darknight10000 no he’s a traitor he has Irish citizenship but moved to Britain
Jim Kerman clearly you haven’t studied us history. It’s not that way anymore
@@calibvr how is he a traitor. In the EU he's allowed to do that. I think Ireland is a traitor because it left the United kingdom
I think most people who oppose the electoral college are also frustrated by the fact that with a slight majority for one candidate in a given state, all electoral votes go toward that candidate. This makes the election extremely centralized around random “battleground states.” Also, this makes being a Republican in California or a democrat in Texas a futile prospect-what’s the point of even voting for your preferred non-state preferred candidate?
That's the beauty of the Electoral College, it requires a candidate to actually work for the win.
That’s why I strongly believe that a potentially better reform of the electoral college/vote is to go the way of Maine and Nebraska (if memory serves me right?) and allocate electoral votes proportionally based on the popular vote within the state. For example, let’s say in California the Democrat wins 60% of the vote and the Republican wins 40%. With California’s 55 electoral votes, the Democrat wins 33 electoral votes and the Republican wins 22.
@@King_George_VI This encourages gerrymandering even more and does nothing to solve any of the overarching problems. The Maine/Nebraska system is the exact same as the current state-wide winner takes all system but on a smaller scale. You're still going to have votes thrown out and states that dont matter at all politically, or perhaps just districts that don't matter politically. Instead of making everyone matter, or even just a few states matter, you're moving that to districts and consolidating electoral power within arbitrarily defined areas. Who cares about the folks in Ohio as a whole then? They'd only care about Ohio's battleground districts. Who would care about anyone in Alabama or Mississippi? They have no battleground districts at all. Maryland is a solid 10 Dem votes even with this system, despite percents not being 100-0.
Maine/Nebraska solution is not the solution to our problem, and this is coming from someone who lives within one of these battleground districts (KY-06).
Tl:dr; The maine/nebraska system on a large scale does nothing to fix the issue and even exacerbates it in certain areas
You forget that having it be a popular vote makes the Californian and Texan pointlessness problem even worse. its essentially the winner take all system everyone complains about when it comes to the electoral college. Ex: Candidate 1 gets 30% of vote. Candidate 2 gets 20% of vote. Candidate 3 gets 17% of vote. Candidates 4-7 get a collective 33% of the vote = Candidate 1 gets all the electoral college votes for that state. A state in which 70% of the state voted against the candidate and could all theoretically be of the other party.
Look guy, if you want a system in which the smaller states get the proportional amount of power in government (meaning irrelevance) then abolish the republic and become an empire. Who knows you may even bring about a new era of peace and progress like Rome did. I'd be up for that but I highly doubt you would, your call. : p
@@darken2417 You realize there is also something called ranked choice voting correct? And popular vote would mean the state issue is not an issue anymore, so I have no idea what you're even talking about now.
1:30 I just noticed that in the room are only 12 stares, with Rhode Island standing outside the window staring angrily, because Rhode Island was against the constitution and was the last to ratify it.
Grey just goes crazy with background details like this.
Came for the information, stayed for the argument between our founding fathers and modern time-traveling, non-land owning stick man
Freak👌
Founding mothers, you mean
Imagine if he told them he were Irish!? 😅
@@souvikrc4499 most of them were men
edit: all of them were men
"Do you even own land?"
I'm gonna use this every time I'm losing a debate
"Do you even own land?"
Or winning
Intrusion 2
Say it like Eddie Izzard did in his flag bit.
But... You don't own land either.
Poll: Is Gray more obsessed with flags or the electoral college? Too bad there isn’t an official flag of the electoral college.
There is. It's a white square with a picture of a middle finger being pointed at everyone that doesn't live in a "battleground state."
@@shaunmcisaac782 you took my comment! FACTS!
I have a feeling the Electoral College Flag would be one of those peeing Calvin and Hobbes cartoons except Calvin would be peeing on an American voter while giving the Statue of Liberty the finger.
Arthas Menethil lmao
Ricardo Santos Is he a big Hillary fan? I don’t think he really publicly stated his political opinions.
Just as an update for the Nevadans out there:
This plan passed in Nevada's state congress but was ultimately vetoed by Governor Steve Sisolak. Just thought I'd let you know.
that blows
Aww.
“Do you own land?”
“No”
*BEGONE*
Universal suffrage brought down western nations. Prove me wrong
@@TheBelrick
You have the burden of proof. You have to provide an explanation for your view.
*PEASANT*
@@TheBelrick why does everyone who makes shitty arguments put the burden of proof on the person they are arguing with?
Funny how they used to own land when doing so today is impossible. I wonder if these guys making these new laws had anything to do with that?
“Do you even own land?”
“...No.”
That hit deep.
Sir Mount not black people, or women, or indentured servants, or...
U2be Fake
Look at you,,,with
all of them hysterrikal knowings.
You'd make tens of dollars on Jeopardy.
@@u2befake149 not one of those groups is mentally sound enough on average to deserve the privilege of voting and the founding fathers understood that. you should seriously consider taking your politically correct glasses off...
He lives in the UK of course he doesn’t own land
@@voltagedrop5899 So obviously you're one of the people who believe that women and nonwhites are like, neurologically inferior. There's no point arguing with you on this, given literally all of the science disagrees with you and you won't listen no matter what. But, I do have a question. Are you like, a bonehead? Maybe one of those conspiracy theorist types like Alex Jones? Perhaps a "Western Civilization" lover? Or even are you just a full-on raging neo-Nazi? I'm getting important statistics here about the reactionary lunatics who deny science here and every hyper-conservative with the intellectual maturity of a toddler is a vital data point. Please respond immediately
2019: Do you even lift, bro?
1787: Do you even own land, bro?
Then why would we listen to you? Goodbye.
4,000,000,000s B.C.: Do you even self-replicate, bro?
more like 2012
And slaves
Copy and paste of my reply to another comment:
There is a certain idea for why that was. Basically, the reason why only landed citizens were allowed to vote/voice opinions is because they are the ones who were deemed to have a vested interest in the nation as a whole. Anyone without land would have no strings holding them back and leaving to a different nation after they have voted for a law/leader that would affect the nation far after they left. This is why certain people in the 1700s that live in areas where voting was more open really disliked college students for, since the vast majority of them would leave after influencing the politics of the place that would affect the place after they left. Long story short, people who own land, stay where their land is, and therefor can be trusted to look after the interests of the nation, as anything that is good for the nation, is good for their land.
Dude.
Do you know how fucking hard it is to make this stuff so easy to listen to? I love this channel. Please never give up on it
(*_*)
“Do you even own land?”
“No-“
“Goodbye”
Which state was that that threw him back too?
I thiiink it’s new york. Which feels extra fitting for all the trouble with the boat race and islands. 🤣
@AI Martins In a decade, Texas might be join the club.
This non land owner. Pshaw. "Pshaw," I say!
@@JohnDangcilGeekWere New York
pfft imagine not owning land *nervous sweating*
I know right! *anxious laughter*
It's honestly just obscene he can make those claims without land! *loosens shirt-collar*
“I used the electoral college to destroy the electoral college...”
Like using Epstein to kill Epstein? Got it!
"I used the state votes to destroy the state votes."
Raik Epstein didn’t kill himself
r/yourjokebutworse
@@birbies r/thisisnotreddit
I love how NY is the state that is always shown as the most smug of them all LMAO.
because it is
Yeah, we're smug as hell.
As a New Yorker, I can confirm we are all very smug.
The accuracy is incredible
I just like how bored the Supreme Court stick figure looks throughout the whole thing.
It would actually be wilder than that. There won't just be US supreme court cases, there will be court cases in EVERY SINGLE one of the participating states because many of those state constitutions say troubling things like "the will of the people" (of that state). NPV goes directly against that and ignored the will fo the people of that state to, instead, bow to the will of NY and CA.
@@mantissaga4795 Why not just use direct ? That way the president is chosen by the people, and Conservatives will not be able to complain about CA and NY having to much influence, or Liberals about samaller states having too much influence compared to their population.
FRED ALFREDO this isn’t a concern to me ( a conservative ), of the five most populous states three of the five voted Republican, this is a good thing for the Republicans.
FRED ALFREDO this isn’t a concern to me ( a conservative ), of the five most populous states three of the five voted Republican, this is a good thing for the Republicans.
@@itchyscientist0576 I really don't care about Conservatives or Liberals, I just don't want candidates to only care (or at least pretend to care) abou a hand full of States, if the US had a direct vote every vote would count, not only swing States. Democrats would pay more attention to rural voters, and Republicans would pay more attention to the Big cities , not everyone is a farmer or a coal miner, and not everyone is a city Starbucks hipster.
The last 2% is the hardest to get, that’s why they leave it in the milk
*confused Rosa face*
I laughed more than I should have.
I don't get it.
Help me lol I'm not American
@@ineverknew5331 Brooklyn 99
@@ineverknew5331 reference
1:25 Noticed that Rhode Island is standing outside the room, looking pissed- because Rhode Island initially boycotted the drawing-up of the Constitution, and was the last of the thirteen states to sign it!
TIL
Geez there was a lot of thought put behind some jokes
treehugger0241 what does TIL mean
@@ineedanewname4844 TIL=Today I learned
@@ineedanewname4844 stands for "today i learned" :)
The thing is, the constitution was thee 'oops we messed up last time let's try to fix this' document. We used to go by the Articles of Confederation where the states were about as united as the EU is.
Peak libertarianism
Less so. The constitution was basically the EU + some military and taxation. States still had their own militias and the federal government could only tax interstate trade.
The constitution was also illegal, and essentially a coup.
@@eifbkcn South Koreas independence IS also illegal, and most of the countries history was of coups against whats now North Korea.
If the Victor doesn't get the spoils, then we can at least be sure they don't go to the former empire
@@eifbkcn Brittain was barely legal according too global law of the old world, with the old French mostly determining their legitimacy and what land they have the right to occupy.
Republics recognize no overlords, so Brittain got big and the French got small. And then we start spreading constitional democracy, which allowed each Republic to recognize each other's sovereignty and then to actually work together without having to worry about invasion from the others
“Do you even own land?”
“No...”
“Then why would we listen to you, goodbye.”
I choked on my sandwich
Poor grey being bullied by little girls wearing state-flag dresses
It's true though!
"Grey... when a Founding Father asks you if you are a landowner, you say YES!"
Why would you even eat while watching a CGP Grey video?
You know you're going to choke.
Michael Foti Why are you eating a sandwich so early in the morning?
`"It survived for a thousand generations"? - Surely must be very short generations...
I am the senate!
Didn't Rome use a similar system
It's a Star Wars meme
@@andrewputnam2717 as the usa? No not at all
Really depends on which time. Rome had a history of nearly 400 years _before_ becoming an empire. Throughout it's history it went from plutocratic oligarchy, to stratified democracy, to plutocratic democracy, to elected oligarchy, to not-so-elected stratified oligarchy, then for a while lots of people claimed to be in charge but no-one really was, then Ceasar said "you know what, military dictatorship sounds like a good idea".
Of all those systems, I'd say the stratified democracy had _some_ similarities to the USA, such as regions appointing who is first-among-equals in the senate, the assembly being elected by the people, and the justice system not caring at all, but there are also significant differences, such as the senate being elected only by citizens of Rome (the city) itself, the votes being cast by-family rather than by-person, and votes being weighted by how much money the family had, and, of course, the first-among-equals of the senate was so unimportant that nobody cared who it was until Ceaser showed up and said "Military Dictatorship!"
I'd like to replace all AI with CGPs voice.
Luca god i want a gray-ps
Maybe it is 😉
No problem at All
ua-cam.com/video/0sR1rU3gLzQ/v-deo.html
@@14OF12 Wow that is insane!
Do you want the singularity, Luca? Because that's how you get the singularity...
Nevada is boring. Can't they count faster or something
how to count votes like nevada:
step 1: count one vote
step 2: get bored, claim you'll finish tomorrow
step 3: repeat step one the next day
>Do you even own land?
This should be the new "do you even lift, bro?"
YES
it's the old "do you even lift, bro?"
It WAS the original “do you even lift?” Before lifting was a thing
In fact it is probably the old "do you even lift, bro?"
Yess we must make this a thing
"Do you even own land?"
I laughed so hard.
It's the "Do you even lift, bro?" of the political world.
@@Tubeytime Do you even land, bro?
@@jebblottin92 The implication was that if you owned land you had a vested interest in what happened to it. You weren't just a hired hand that could get up and move on down the road to some other farm or business. You were part of the long term fabric of the community, you paid property taxes for the upkeep of that community (before an income tax), and so you were a person that was allotted the right to weigh in on what happened to that community and how it was run.
Contrasting that to those who would invite foreigners into the country who have no vested interest other than free benefits, and giving them the right to vote. How do you think that would turn out?
Oh sorry, don't know Izzard so have no reference. Carry on then. ;)
What is this? An affable, civilised, conversation in my YT?
5:26 Wyoming is just ON A BISON
Edit: I never thought that a comment about a humanized state riding on a bison would be my most popular comment
...and begging the union for federal money to clean up the mess they caused when they actively encouraged terrorists to burn, loot, pillage, rape, and murder.
@@KaeYossummmm
@@KaeYoss funni bison
And I think New York is holding a base ball bat
@@Tr_Fast and Texas is carrying a pair of revolvers cowboy stye
I'm sad the spreadsheet video that came out with this is now locked behind membership when it originally wasn't. :(
I like how the stick figure representing Wyoming is riding a bison. That's exactly how we get around up here. Thanks, CGP👌
yes
next Grey represents Australia riding a kangaroo
you don't exist
Wyoming doesn’t exist stupid
wait dang it
@@archangel4670 Are you out of your mind?? don't let them know that you know. The government doesn't want anyone to know that it's just an engram implanted into people's minds- -gets dragged off-
“Where is the Electoral College? You used it two elections ago.”
“I used the Electoral College to destroy the Electoral College.”
"In order to ensure our security and continuing stability, the Republic will be reorganized into the first Galactic Empire for a safe and secure society."
@@JuliusCaminus We truly do live in a society.
States forming a union without Federal approval is unconstitutional so...
I love democracy.
"It nearly... killed the votes. But the work is done. It always will be. I am... inevitable."
I appreciate that Alaska has mittens
EC: You guys can vote however you want
States: *However* however?
EC, hesitant: yeah...
Loyal65 well yes but actually no
Yes but I’m hindsight no
What could go wrong?
EC: Shouldn't have done that.
@@abstractnonsense3253 RAMPANT VOTER FRAUD in POPULAR THE VOTE.
I still can't believe how perfectly you've captured a smug expression for the stick figures.
You mean his animator ...
@@soupytho He animates his own videos.
@@soupytho He makes all his own videos. He even made a video on why he doesn't want to hire animators or researchers.
He works with animators, as he mentions in Cortex episode 41.
He did hire animators, he had public tryouts and mentions his current ones use After Effects in Cortex episode 41.
Thanos: "I used the Electoral College to Destroy the Electoral College"
*snap*
I was about to comment that lol
I wish I had thought of that.
Gone reduced to atoms.
@Dadsplains
=The Current NaPoVoInterCo Status=
Number of states that adopted: 15 + D.C.
Number of states that are pending: 3 (Michigan, Pennsylvania & Texas)
Number of votes in the Electoral College: 195
Percentage of votes in the Electoral College: 72.2%
Number of votes in the Electoral College IF the pending adoptions are passed: 269
Percentage of votes in the Electoral College IF the pending adoptions are passed: 99,7% (approximately)
I was gonna complain how the states only hold 2 colours of boxes, almost as if they only have only 2 options
Ah, wait
If the Supreme Court rules against California, please feel free to lodge an official complaint that your name is not on the Ballot... assuming you are native born and over 35 years of age.
Lets see if we can force more choices then 2!
@@lostbutfreesoul Having more names on the ballot doesn't matter unless we remove the first past the post voting system.
@@IlIlllIllIlIIIll Would this dumb compact apply?
Maine has a choice because they have Ranked Choice Voting.
@@IlIlllIllIlIIIll I mean if there is ranked choice and the person with the most second choices wins, would the states have to consider that to be the most popular candidate and direct their votes to it?
Past State: "Do you even LIVE in america?"
CGPGrey: "no I live in the UK..."
Past State: "He's a red coat!"
CGP Grey: "No wait, the countries are totally cool now-"
*Shove through time portal*
I can think of better places to flush communist bullsheet down. Thank the founding fathers for their infallible wisdom to have created this check.
By the way do you think Op (e.g. CPG) missed out on his own joke, about the United States NOT being a Democracy? (i.e. Mob mentality rules?) 'Cause this is what's he pleading for. The fuxxking hypotwit. One meerly has to wonder if the poles reversed, and dear old Killary had been appointed as the President. Under these conditions. Do you suppose CPG would still have made this Video, and or the tiresome arguments theirin?
@@Ichijoe2112 the US IS a democracy. It just isn't a direct democracy. Democracies and republics are not mutually exclusive.
@@Ichijoe2112 well considering he was against the electoral college even before the 2016 election, he probably would still be making this video. Although, would you still like the college if Hillary would have been elected?
Ichijoe2112 He’s been against the electoral college long before Trump he has videos about it dating back to like 2011.
@@Ichijoe2112 God I love how upset you are.
So fun note about the "do you even own land" thing is that when the constitution was written really the only major tax was property tax, no income tax yet, so if you didn't own land you didn't really pay taxes and thus you shouldn't get a vote since the founders were all about the whole taxation going with representation thing. Now it's not relevant because we have so many new taxes.
Prefaced with, "i dont think they should but" if Taxation is the requisite for representation (and why not, it was the basis for the founding of the country after all), then anyone that has bought something off the shelf in America (and thus paid some form of Tax) should get a vote of some kind?
Just a thought.
Mark Davison I would say it is because that random person buying a thing in America was not forced to buy it from America. The issue that came from The Colonies being taxed by the British is that the British forced them to buy the things that were taxed only from Britain thereby forcing The Colonies to pay a tax that they may not have had to pay had they been allowed to look elsewhere. That is just my two cents on the matter.
So fun video clip about the "do you even own land" thing is that it's now on my channel and it's a loopable video (please give me watchtime kthx) ua-cam.com/video/9QPSOy4g_cg/v-deo.html
Neat
I know they favored "no taxation without representation," but not getting a vote without paying taxes is "no representation without taxation." Were the founders also about that? There's a big difference between "no rum without water," and "no water without rum."
I love the one state just yelling "How many states are in the future?!"
Guess it's not so "sneaky" anymore after this video.
There's a lot of conservative commentators who have talked about it on multiple occasions.
Honestly it hasn't been all that sneaky for a while. Keeps popping up in various news feeds everywhere
It's really not sneaky, it been talked about for some time across the board. It's likely that it will gain little traction. But it will level the playing field, Odessa Texas won't be able to decide what flavours of Juul are regulated in Rochester New York. That's about all this will accomplish because it doesn't really establish that states will actually change the way they vote.
@@DeepFriedBeans23819 if there's a state regulating things going on in another state, then we've got bigger problems than the electoral college.
The Constitution establishes various non interference policies, to prevent that.
And I'm sure it's an example that you brought up, but, nonetheless, I know it can occur between states.
@@RyuuTenno the point is that this type of "state alliance" kind of voting is that it really doesn't do anything
Why does Wyoming get to bring its pet bison into the Supreme Court?
Nathaniel Vitale cuz it’s Wyoming, it gets to do whatever the fuck it wants
It that or there inbreed cousin, and the bison is better behaved
If Wyoming gets a bison I say Colorado can bring a bison made of weed
Because that bison is 20% of wyomings population.
They don't have enough people, so they bring bison.
I love how Texas and Alaska had accessories on their figure.
Also California is holding a camera and the American figure has a pistol
At least for Texas, she gets to be different because she was her own nation at one point.
If you live in Britain be sure to visit the old Texan embassy.
@Alicia en el Pais de las Maravillas Ikr. Texans have a way to make themselves sound "special."
"Do you even own land?"
"Yes, glad you asked. I actually own several NFTs for regions of the moon, Mars and asteroids orbiting our solar system."
"A... what?"
"NFTs; non-fungible tokens. It's basically a way to plant a flag on the thing you want, but without ever actually going there, and without anybody recognizing your ownership."
"Sooo... you don't, own land... ?"
"No :("
Grey doesn’t own land? Next thing you’re gonna tell me is he doesn’t own a horse lol
I'm sure you understand the reference.
@@wholeNwon *WOOSH*
@@ARavingLobster nailed it bro. I am proud.
@@wholeNwon I'm sure you reference the understanding.
Free white male landowner?
"Did you forget about that? Don't worry, I got carried away..."
You and your entire channel nicely summed up there..
I like how everybody only cares for Grey not owning land.
There is a certain idea for why that was. Basically, the reason why only landed citizens were allowed to vote/voice opinions is because they are the ones who were deemed to have a vested interest in the nation as a whole. Anyone without land would have no strings holding them back and leaving to a different nation after they have voted for a law/leader that would affect the nation far after they left. This is why certain people in the 1700s that live in areas where voting was more open really disliked college students for, since the vast majority of them would leave after influencing the politics of the place that would affect the place after they left. Long story short, people who own land, stay where their land is, and therefor can be trusted to look after the interests of the nation, as anything that is good for the nation, is good for their land.
@@bilguunsuvargakhairkhan5533 Here comes the insidious part: remember the whole "women can vote" thing? It was all just a facade. The thing is, not only owners of land, but also owners of businesses could vote, which means that only people with a stake in the country's economy could vote. But then feminism comes along, sneakily pushing not for women's rights, but for the fact that everyone, not just people who have an actual interest in voting and a stake in the economy, to vote. If I was given the ability to revoke that change and go back to how it was, I would do so in a heartbeat, even though I wouldn't be able to vote either.
Skip a couple decades and now the US is basically allowing illegal aliens and the dead to vote democrat, and emigration from blue states like commiefornia is turning the red states purple.
The current democracy in the states is a farce, Trump wasn't supposed to win in 2016, and dems and big corporations have been doing everything in their power to never allow another non-dem candidate to win.
TLDR everything is fucked and you are too late to stop any of it.
@@guysome7469 Well now I want to clarify that by no means do I endorse xenophobia, conspiracy theories, racism, sexism, and classism by my comment, I was simply trying to explain the reasoning people in the 1700s used to create their voter rights laws.
@@guysome7469 I bet if you could watch your landlord do your wife, you'd do so too in a heartbeat.
@@guysome7469 All men had a right to vote because of the Draft system... not because of Feminism...
We also wouldn’t notice this in effect if the Electoral College winner also wins the popular vote
I love the animation of Grey just getting bullied by a bunch of little girls.
I dont think you meant it that way, but man this reads weird.
And he had a robotic arm.
You want dominant Lolis I see, weirdo
@@Zephyrs009 EW I DIDN’T MEAN IT LIKE THAT I SWEARRRR.
@@eggmon420 silence we all know you want angry little girls to dominate yoy
Watched this like 5 times and just noticed Rhode Island peeking into the Constitutional Convention from outside.....
Philip Pierdomenico yeah saw it too... why tho?
@@iknowihaveanincrediblysmal6103 they weren't there at the time.
Rhode Island didnt send any delegates to the Constitutional Convention
As a Rhode Island I find it as my job to inform you. Rhode Island did not want to sign due to the fact that they would lose power that they have gained from the Constitution (that didn’t work) and because of they being so small, they would not have as much power as the other states.
@@Tr4cK17 hahaha
I’d like to argue that Ms. Arizona also gets a pair of revolvers
And cowboy hat. It is where Tombstone is.
votekyle3000 Arizona Ranger with a big iron on her hip
Don't forget nunchucks
I’m fine with having revolvers.
Ms. Texas wouldn't clear leather before a bullet fairly ripped
There might be more to this constitutionally, but it seems pretty clearly legit: "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors" Like they could be having a hot dog eating contest to determine who gets to pick elector appointment
Game of charades or a karaoke competition
Matt Stonie for president!
The state constitutions might have something to say about that as well.
@@tz8785 many do, but a majority just go with retired members of the winning party by tradition and political ease. It’s so that there’s less chance of faithless electors (who also are supposed to be part of this system too, but kind of aren’t these days and might receive some legal and party spite even when there’s no laws against them, but that basically means independents and third parties rarely if ever get electors even in proportional situations and makes an independent win quite unlikely).
"Did you think this compromisetitution was for direct democracy? LOL" - 😂
Hell. A direct democracy would be a nightmare. No politician would have any incentive to care about rural areas and you have farmers strikes every couple of years due to their worsening situation.
@@dariendark7263 No presidential candidate already cares about farmers all the electoral college does is make everybody focus on the rust belt
@@dariendark7263
The farmers are already being bent over and taken by the large Agri business.
You realize most farmland is corporate owned now and it's continuing to get a larger share of that industry yearly? Nearly all the money Trump allocated to farmers due the disaster of a trade war he started went to large Agri companies, not mom and pop farmers like we (Americans) still believe run said farms.
Almost all sectors of the economy are being sucked up and centralized into 2 or 3 companies, farmers included.
@@dariendark7263 The location of a citizen is irrelevant. Rural votes shouldn't count more than urban votes.
Constitutional republic
Of course Wyoming Charges in with a bison.
Every Wyomingite has a bison mount.
Mine has battle armor.
I know this is sarcasm...
(whispers)...but I want it to be true...
Ah, so you paid for the Bison Armor DLC, i see.
@@koboldparty4708 I heard it was just cosmetic, though.
Whats his name
Same for us Texans, everyone is required to tote around two Colt Peacemakers on their belt at all times or else get deported to Austin.
Love how Rhode Island is mad getting left out while NC finally ratifies.
1. Import easily manipulated non-Americans, both legally and illegally
2. Control the MSM
3. Oops we forgot the Social media in 2016. Fixed: Control the Social media
4. Tell the people who to vote for. Elections are now selections
@@TheBelrick
Illegal immigrants can't vote for president. People with green cards can't vote for president. You MUST be a citizen. Your plan would immediately fail.
@@jorceshaman No voter ID required. Good job on ignoring that you DNC hack.
"In a stunning ruling, the Supreme Court of the United States struck down an Arizona law requiring voters to present citizenship proof to register in state and federal elections."
@@jorceshaman also why do you ignore the fact that the MSM is a arm of the DNC? That Social media are banning and censoring conservative political groups. never left wing
Oh and lest we forget. Obamas IRS controversy.
@@TheBelrick What a bizarre you live in that you need to import non-americans to control the vote like most of the population isn't already lobotomized to vote like they tell them to in function of their owen personal fears and biases. Fox news has been doing this for decades. (www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/9/8/16263710/fox-news-presidential-vote-study )
"You can't trust the people!"
How can a statement be so true and yet so brave
People really like direct democracy until they realize that centrism has gravity and voting in a plurality voting system means your vote is a coin toss.
it isn't...? its an example of what garbage people the founding fathers were.
@@baronvonbeandip America is currently a plurality voting system
1776 burn that still holds up today:
“Do you even own land?”
Uh thats not 1776 pal. Thats the Constitutional convention in 1787. Thats where they singed the constitution. 1776 was where they signed the Declaration of independence.
@@fancy_pants8889 found the party animal.
Yay, capitalism...am i right?😂😂😂
This just proves what dumbassery most "mayflower" US immigrants was. They literally runs from royal servitude and capitalist oppression in the old world just to esthablished the same nasty system in america
@@nurlindafsihotang49 Uhh what that makes no sense seeing as still lots of nations un Europe still used feudalism like Russia and other great powers. And capitalism has been the best amd most useful economic system for over 400 years. What would you pefer? Socialism?
@@nurlindafsihotang49 except the prevailing economic system for european nations that were colonizing america at the time wasnt capitalism it was mercantilism
“I used the electoral college to destroy the electoral college”
-Thanos (probably)
Rcv Now the electoral college served no more purpose but beyond temptations
*President Thanos
@@epoole1 The hardest decisions require the strongest wills
@left-wingers-are-terrorists das cool but I don't remember askin...
This feels like how a civil war starts
Considering the current situation, it's probably the perfect spark to really kick off that long awaited civil war.
Well, the previous civil war did start because of the poutcome of an election, so it's not crazy
prepare for the boogaloo
@@Zakjuh Civil War 2? One side doesn't believe in weapons! More like Civil slaughter.
@@ReptilianLepton ngl i thought of that but was unsure if it was in the constution or the articles of confederation
The real problem is the number of House Reps was set at 435 back in 1910 when our population was only about 90 million. Thus, about 1 House Rep for every 200,000 people. Today we are a population of 328 million, and 435 House Reps results in 1 House Rep for every 754,000 people. (Much eroding everyone's "enfranchisement" in Congress and the EC!) If we had the same proportion today, (i to 200k) we would have about 1640 House Reps. Congress would be changed radically and so would the Electoral College, since there would be 1691 EC Electors! And it would all be perfectly constitutional!
(I mean, the House of Representative is supposed to represent THE POPULTION OF TODAY! Right? And NOT the population of 1910!)
Do you even own land? Damn that is a one hell of an old school burn.
Excited to see that you're back with some classic grey content - the Electoral College!
How many channels can make that claim.
1:25 I like how Rhode Island is outside complaining
I like how RI started laughing at "The People" lol
So why is Rhode Island outside? Does it mean something?
@@MrPopoCoalti they refused to come to the constitutional Congress
@@tajhaybanks8656 Thank you
My question though is... what happens if members of this plan don't follow through? Like they have enough members for it to go into effect and during the next election some members don't follow the nationwide majority? Is there a consequence? Because if it is true that states can cast their votes however they like, it sounds like there wouldn't be and if there isn't any consequence for not following through, then I see little chance of this plan actually working out in the end. Or, at least, not being a long term solution.
Future Americans: “What happened to the Electoral College?”
CGP Grey: “I used the college to destroy the college.”
Connor Healy - Assuming America even exists and isn’t Mexico del Norte.
I am the collage.
@@GamerFromJump How would it become mexico del norte? Does mexico sponsor reigime change in the United States? Do they conquer it through military conquest? Does Mexico become the senate?
Dargon Dude well... is either north México or south canada.
@@MaxJey2 south Canada sounds more realistic as Mexico has way less power/Influence even compared to Canada. However I think since America has so many guns that even they would have a hard time taking over that it would just be a similar situation as the Civil war join one side of America as you would have America A and America B
If you want to give any branch of government more or less power, just hire an electrician to change the number of outlets in the Oval Office, Supreme Court, or Congress.
I am ashamed to say this took me more than a second to understand
Nah, that just gives them more access to power. What you really want to do is either add a generator or maybe install some solar panels.
Lol you win the internet with this comment today..
.......
One could also (secretly) install remote power outlet controllers hidden inside the drywall/lathe & plaster - to control how and when branches of Government have access to power.
Would be fun to watch.
Now why dies that sound familiar?🤔
@@ivanov093 The White House actually did already have solar panels more than 30 years ago.
Electrician here- just switch the breakers/fuses out for a different size. Far easier than installing outlets.
"The states less populous produce preponderate presidential picking power per person." Awesome alliteration, as always.
The issue with this idea though is that it takes manybstates to equal the votinf power of 1 state...
California has 50 votes where as the smallest states only have 3... You would need nearly all the bread basket to equal 1 california. Once you tack on Illinois (bevause chicago single handedly controls the whole state), and NY, you pretty much have a HUGE lead right there.
@@NecroAsphyxia But that's precisely because there are SO many people living in California. Why should those people be punished and told their opinion matters less just because they live in a populous area? Land doesn't have rights, people do - and people deserve the right to a fair vote.
@@NecroAsphyxia But don't you see how broken it is? Right now small states that shouldn't deserve 1 whole rep get a whole rep anyway, while CA is undercut +10 reps. & as small states gets smaller & large states get larger that script will flip & CA will have too many votes absolutely anyway.
Along w/ this meta initiative we need to triple the # of reps so as for 1 to reasonably keep their finger on the pulse of the ppl; & in turn the ppl keep the official to account. We also need to end insistence on 1st past the post vote tally. I say Borda count for high office & STV for reps.
@@NecroAsphyxia Right now small rural states are cut loose by their senators & presidential candidates alike. A popular vote will make them try harder; 2016 was decided by ~70K in just a couple counties. Majority rule>minority rule>despotic unaccountable rule.
@Ian Jones Maybe I'm not being clear enough? Candidates don't give a shit about states big or small right now! They go to the same 5 counties in the same 5 swing states 11/10. That is undemocratic, penultimate only to an actual unchecked despot. The top 20 cities being visited is much more democratic than visiting 0. Pls don't be a single issue voter that cuts off his nose to spite his face. I don't mean disrespect; IDK how else to describe it?
The Electoral College probably made sense when counting votes and reporting those counts could take months.
Now (barring idiocy) it takes days to a couple of weeks to count, and moments to report the results.
-
And for anyone who thinks the Electoral College is a genius idea, remember it came from the same minds that said Governors should select their state's senators. Oh, and that women, non-land owners, and humans who were property didn't get a vote.