منتديات - منتدى - شدات ببجي - شحن شدات ببجي - شحن ببجي - متجر ببجي - متجر شدات ببجي - شعبية ببجي - شدات - شحن روبلوكس - شحن يلا لودو - اقساط - شدات ببجي اقساط - شدات ببجي - شدات ببجي تمارا - شدات ببجي تابي - شحن يلا لودو - شحن يلا لودو اقساط - تقسيط بطاقات سوا - موبايلي اقساط - زين اقساط - ايتونز امريكي اقساط - ايتونز سعودي اقساط - شعبية ببجيمتجر اقساط - شدات ببجي - حسابات ببجي - شدات ببجيشدات ببجي اقساط - شدات ببجي - متجر busd
alabdy Senior Member

The winner-take-all system used by the Electoral College in the United States appears nowhere in the Constitution. It awards all of a state’s electors to the candidate with the most votes, no matter how small the margin of victory. Critics say that means millions of votes are effectively ignored.

The fairness of the Electoral College was seriously questioned in the 1960s. Amid the civil rights push, changes to the system were framed as the last step of democratization. But a constitutional amendment to introduce a national popular vote for president was eventually killed by segregationist senators in 1970.

Desire for an overhaul dwindled until the elections of 2000 and 2016, when the system’s flaws again came to the fore. In both instances, the men who became president had lost the popular vote.

Jesse Wegman, a member of The Times’s editorial board, describes how the winner-take-all system came about and how the Electoral College could be modified.

Guest: Jesse Wegman, a member of The New York Times’s editorial board.

For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily

Background reading:


أكثر...

أدوات الموضوع
انواع عرض الموضوع

نون - نون ستار - نون السعودية
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. منتديات فوريو
adv aglitk by : aglitk