Hacker News Reader

We've had 5 occasions where the president lost the popular vote but won't the election and 2 of them were in the past 18 years. Do you think most people look at that situation and go "if only I had voted, then things would be different". Between that and a few court rulings that have turned the major elections into an event only the rich and their friends can partake in, I don't see how it's not people bring systematically repressed

View on HN

That the popular vote isn't who wins is a feature. It helps prevent the tyranny of the majority. Of course if you are in the majority that lost you hate it, while the minority like it.

Tyranny of minority isn't better than tyranny of the majority.

> That the popular vote isn't who wins is a feature. It helps prevent the tyranny of the majority

No, it doesn't. It lowers the threshold for dictating policy, and biases it to particular interests; that makes tyranny of those interests more likely, including when they command a bare majority (or even large minority) of support.

You don't fight tyranny of the majority by unequal representation; you fight tyranny of the majority with constitutional limits on what government can do at all, or by requirements for supermajorities or (as some state constitutions do) multiple time-separated votes (or both!) for particular kinds of action.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com