So…an hour or so ago when you were so sure that Thomas Jefferson agreed with you it was totally okay for you to use him against me. Now that I’ve shown that you didn’t know what he actually believed there’s suddenly no way of knowing what Thomas Jefferson thought about anything. Sounds to me like you’re conceding the point there.
Also, sure, I’ll bite on whatever little gotcha game you’re going for. I do believe that each person should have a vote and each person’s vote should count equally. I will note that since 1913 we have had that system for every office in the United States of America except for the President. I will also note that everything I’ve written that you’ve responded to strongly implies that as my electoral belief. So you’re obviously just waiting for me to say something so you can offer some brilliant explanation of why I’m wrong.
Because I’d like to point one thing out to you: California, Texas, and New York might be the most populous states in the United States, but they do not contain more than half of the voters in the United States. Moreover, they. Are. Not. Monolithic. Structures.
Those three states accounted for 14.2 million votes for Clinton and 10.6 million votes for Trump. That accounts for 20% of the votes cast in the election. Before I have to defend myself to you it’s imperative that you defend yourself to me. Assume for a moment that one candidate manages to get every single voter in all three of those states. How are they going to win the election on just those votes alone?
Why don’t you just give up the game and admit what you really fear: that the Republicans can’t win if we give this over to a pure popular vote?
And, please, if you’re going to try to take me on Illinois without actually learning anything about what’s going on, why don’t you tell me who made what promises to whom?
Also, while you’re are at it, why don’t you tell me what “bread-and-circuses” means. I’m not at all convinced that you actually know, since you’ve used it twice in a context completely different from its actual meaning. Because, “they have promised more than they can fulfill — bread-and-circuses — ” is neither the original meaning of the term nor the way it’s commonly used in modern politics.