65% of U.S. adults say the way the president is elected should be changed so that the winner of the popular vote nationwide wins the presidency.

  • You solve the 'problem' of 'tyranny of the majority' by having a strong constitution and good rights and protections for minorities, not by switching to the indisputably worse option of 'tyranny of the minority'. Because that causes the exact same problem, but for even more people instead.

    • The version of the tyranny of the majority that he's warning against is already solved in the American system. The ward against it is the Senate. Every state has exactly 2 votes in the Senate and no legislation can be passed and enacted into law without passing a vote in the Senate.

    • aidan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The issue is while a strong constitution is nice, it's necessary to have at least some people in office who would respect the constitution to be effective, including at least a partially originality supreme court.

      • Alternatively, more clearly written constitutional laws. It's wild that you have judges who cannot agree on what an article of the constitution really means, and the language should have been amended years ago.

        In the Netherlands, we have a clearly written constitution, but no real 'supreme court' in the American sense. And that setup seems to work quite well.

        • aidan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Agreed some should be clarified, but a lot are pretty clear but are denied as unclear for political reasons. One obvious example is the 2nd amendment of the bill of rights. Also, keep in the mind the US constitution is the oldest constitution still in use, so language does evolve somewhat.