There’s no shortage of articles on Medium pointing out the flaws of American democracy. So much needs to be fixed. I have addressed some of the popular repairs with articles of my own.
In Abolishing the Electoral College, I address the historical reasons for the Electoral College and two senators per state. To briefly summarize, without these two features, it is unlikely the 13 states could have formed a strong enough country to expand beyond the Appalachians. The USA would be a much smaller nation. If these 18th-century measures are no longer serving the USA very well, the Constitution has an amending formula to fix that. Until the constitution is amended in this way, then the current rules need to be kept in place. That’s how democracy and rule-of-law work together.
In The Moot Point of Gerrymandering, I address the math behind gerrymandering. To summarize, when a political party engages in this electoral technique to gain a small, short-term advantage, it also makes itself more vulnerable to serious defeat should voting patterns change.
In Reforming the US Constitution, I say that advocates for political changes must have a long-term outlook. If 100,000 advocates are only posting internet articles for a political change, such a political change is not going to happen. Someone needs to turn frustration into a movement. And movements require more time and effort.
Are US Elections Undemocratic?
Let’s look at the makeup of the new Congress from the midterm elections. The House is pretty close to a 50/50 split between the D’s and the R’s. The Senate is pretty close to a 50/50 split between the D’s and the Rs. Are not these allocations representative of the wishes of the American people? If one party forms a slim majority, is that a sign that the democratic process is extremely flawed?
Despite the winner-take-all contests, gerrymandering (by both sides), and an electoral bias favoring today’s Republicans, the law of averages applied over 50 states created a Congress that pretty much matched the will of the people.
Electoral College vs. Popular Vote
Like it or not, Donald Trump was a viable contender in 2016. He was a viable contender in 2020. He will be a viable contender in the next Republican primary. If he wins that election, he will still get the support of 45% to 50% of the American voters in the 2024 Presidential race. Again, this is reflective of the 50/50 split in the USA. Like close football games, a slight aberration can determine the victor. For example, Mr. Biden owes his current job to COVID-19 and George Floyd for showing us, before November 2020, the degree of Mr. Trump’s political incompetence to enough people.
Sure, we can lament Mr. Trump’s victory in 2016 as a flaw of the American electoral system. We can also lament that he was supposedly only 40,000 votes short of winning another Electoral College victory in 2020. So there has been a lot of focus on changing the Electoral College for popular vote.
Why is no one else asking why was Donald Trump a viable contender in the first place?
Given that American voting patterns are likely to be 50/50 for the next decade, there is one good reason to keep the Electoral College in place. If the USA goes to a popular vote to elect the president, then any close presidential election will require a recount of ALL POLLING STATIONS across the USA. Can you imagine the chaos with so many recounts happening at the same time? With the Electoral College, the recounts and media attention were focused on one state in 2000 and four states in 2020. Like it or not, the Electoral College simplifies the verification of results of close elections.
Advocates of replacing the Electoral College with the popular vote should keep this old wise saying in mind: “Be careful of what you wish for!”
Muting the Red Wave
Progressives are dancing in the street because the projected red wave failed to materialize. But when the polls were projecting a 50/50 split in the popular vote and Congress was pretty much split 50/50, was there really a red wave ever in the making? Or was this just some media hype to keep people glued to the news channels and keep advertisers shelling out money to keep the channels on the air?
But in case you have not noticed, 30% of Americans seem to be supporting the concept of a one-party state in the USA. The fact that this 30% got 50% of the seats is not going to encourage them to think in a more democratic way. They want 100% of the seats.
Dancing in the streets! Yeesh!
The Republican Internal Battles
Progressives are dancing in the street because Mr. Trump seems to be going downhill politically. There is an internal war in the Republican Party brewing. Yessiree, Mr. Trump is finally getting his political just deserts. And we can watch it unfold. It feels good, doesn’t it?
I was one of the few watchers who believed Mr. Trump could win the presidency in early 2016 when almost everyone else thought there was no way 62 million Americans would ever vote for him. We were entertained by his antics while expecting Ms. Clinton to take a handy win. Well, I’m not ruling out a Trump presidency in 2024.
However, if he does not win the Republican primary, the Trump base should easily fold into the base of the new leader. They want a one-party state so badly.
Mr. Trump is inept. His successor is likely to be capable. To keep the Trump base sated, the successor would be driven to engineer that one-party rule. A Trump presidency in 2024 could be a better result than Mr. Trump losing the Republican primary.
And yet we cheer the Trump demise. Yeesh!
The Short-Term Solution
Only 49% of Americans voted in the 2022 midterms. This leaves 51% of citizens as nonvoters. Had just 10% of the nonvoters cast a Democratic vote, Congress would be heavily slanted to the Democratic side.
But that didn’t happen. Why?
Like it or not, most citizens do not take their politics as seriously as your average political junkie on Medium. This does not mean the nonvoters do not care about today’s politics and the future; they are not as enthused to make the effort to cast a vote for a slight preference. For whatever reason, they do not see much difference between the two parties.
A big part of political campaigns is to energize the lukewarm base to cast a vote. This is why prominent politicians travel from city to city to make speeches and get local media attention. This is why the political parties set up campaign offices on busy streets. This is why the parties send out volunteers to neighborhoods to talk to voters. These volunteers are called canvassers.
Too many people believe that the job of the canvassers is to convince the voters to vote for a particular party. Nothing is further from the truth. There is very little convincing of the other side with canvassing. The job of the canvasser is to identify a voter’s intention. If the voter is favorable, the canvasser will get some contact information, so the campaign office can encourage that person to vote. Campaigns are all about managing the party’s soft support.
A good canvassing team should consist of two people going door-to-door in a particular neighborhood. This team can find an average of three lukewarm voters per hour of canvassing. These voters are not likely to vote without encouragement from the campaign office. This is called “Getting Out the Vote.”
Let’s do some math. If a canvasser team gives up 10 evenings for two hours of canvassing each evening, this should put another 60 votes in the ballot box. When we multiply that by 1000 canvassing teams, that is another 60,000 votes that would not have been cast for the political party. Would you say 60,000 votes in a swing state is a significant contribution to a better democracy?
While it’s kind of sad that lukewarm voters need this encouragement, the reality is that campaigns need canvassers to win close elections. The USA has many close elections.
So my question to all the American Medium political writers who do not like the Republican Party is:
“Did you do any canvassing for the Democrat Party in the midterm elections?”
If not, then you have failed in your democratic duties to give the Republicans the rout they so deserve. At least 120 million Americans did not vote in the 2022 midterms; you could have convinced 60 of them to make the trip to the voting station if you had spent 10 evenings canvassing.
Canvassing is your best return on your political activity. If you did not canvass, then your comfort is more important than the future of your country.
Conclusion
In my opinion, articles that focus on the Electoral College, gerrymandering, the Red Wave, and possible political demise of Mr. Trump show a lack of understanding of the forces shaping American politics. For us plebes who are not power brokers, our best tool to effect the change away from the Republicans is to canvass for the Democrats.
And between elections, you can work toward ensuring eligible voters (on your side of the political fence) are on the voting lists.
Published on Medium 2022
So Politically Paralyzed We Are
