Thread by @fawfulfan

The claim that the Electoral College exists l to prevent "tyranny of the majority" is one of the stupidest arguments I have ever heard.

It makes no sense. Literally none. At all.

Just think about this for a second.

The logic here is that it would be bad if just 51% of people can override the rights of everyone else ... so instead we're going to use a system where FEWER THAN 51% of people can override the rights of everyone else.

The way that you prevent tyranny of the majority is requiring a supermajority vote.

Not making some people's votes count more than others.

That's tyranny of the minority.

The Founders didn't create the Electoral College to prevent a majority from ganging up on a minority. They created it to prevent democracy altogether.

They figured states would appoint the electors and the electors would make their own decision — there wouldn't even be a vote.

We all agree the Founders were wrong about that. That's why, since the 1820s, every state has held a popular vote for electors bound to each candidate.

What is the point of keeping a system that every state decided 200 years ago was so broken they were going to work around it?

If you want to keep that broken-ass system, I disagree with you but you're entitled to your opinion.

But FFS, come up with a better defense of it than "letting fewer than 50% of people elect the president prevents everyone else from being overruled."