Yeah, I never understood really this district thing... Do they that often really represent only the certain area? Or would it be more sane to have larger districts? Maybe in some cases up to whole state where the winners were selected in proportional way.
Then again this would allow third parties to actually gain foothold and the corrupt duopoly can't allow that.
Also this whole electoral college thing. Why is there this idiotic winner takes all method? Why not also maybe have lists. So electors would be chosen in order of list and voters could pick a list endorsing certain candidate pair?
Larger districts give you less accurate representation, not more, as you lose the opportunity to granularly represent the populace. It also gives you more opportunity for individual representatives' personalities and opinions (rather than the policy interests of the electorate), and make it necessary for large interests to bribe fewer people. Lastly, larger districts (and party-defined proportional representation based on them) reduce individual regions' capacity to elect representatives who are responsive to local concerns; as much as the political commentariat would like peoples' policy preferences to be divided perfectly along party lines, that isn't how it works in real life and it risks making collaboration across party lines on any given issue more difficult (by making representatives more beholden to the party than they already are).
To some extent, I feel like Germany's system (where the legislature is elected based on local districts, but then members are added from party lists to achieve proportional balance) could be the solution that incentivizes the least political gerrymandering, but I don't have a finger on the pulse of Germany's political problems to see the drawbacks.
> Why is there this idiotic winner takes all method?
So that slave states could count their slaves as 60% members of their populations for the purposes of gaining electoral votes without having to let their slaves vote.
Then again this would allow third parties to actually gain foothold and the corrupt duopoly can't allow that.
Also this whole electoral college thing. Why is there this idiotic winner takes all method? Why not also maybe have lists. So electors would be chosen in order of list and voters could pick a list endorsing certain candidate pair?