printLiberals disapprove of the brilliant men “who wrote America’s constitution,” you know, the geniuses of the pale patriarchy.
Yes, concedes the Economist, the Senate was devised “to represent places, not people, and there is a case for that; other constitutions, such as Germany’s, look to ensure regional representation in their upper house.”
So far, so good.
But liberals want heavily populated cities and city slickers—they vote Democrat—to drown out rural people, who vote Republicans. So, for ensuring that “the largest states do not dominate the rest,” the Senate is considered bad by liberals. “[T]he constitution provides equal representation for all the states, large and small alike. This builds in an over-representation for people in small or sparsely populated places.”
That liberals can’t abide.
But for the electoral college liberals, who’re ignorant of any political theory other than egalitarianism, reserve the ugliest terms.
The “electoral college,” writes the Economist, is as system “that America’s founders jury-rigged in part to square the needs of democracy with the demography of slavery.”
Come again?
See: “The minority majority: America’s electoral system gives the Republicans advantages over Democrats,” July 12th 2018.