• whome@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    Every European country is small enough that you can drive through it in a day.

    Do you mean the electoral collage still travels by house to Washington? What is your point?

    • uis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      Do you mean the electoral collage still travels by house to Washington?

      Maybe they travel by tra… They don’t have train, do they?

    • Dearth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      2 months ago

      The point is, it’s easier to organize a national election when you don’t have to do it across 50 federated entities and 5 time zones

      • BorgDrone@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        it’s easier to organize a national election when you don’t have to do it across 50 federated entities and 5 time zones

        The US national elections are much, much easier to organize than national elections in EU countries. EU countries have to hold elections for tens of millions of people. In the US national elections only 538 people get to vote.

        There are 50 states that have to hold elections to select representatives for the electoral college, but these are organized by each the state individually, not the federal government. You don’t have one big national election, you have 50 small ones.

        Most US states have only a small number of inhabitants. Even the largest US state, California, only has 38M inhabitants. Less than half of Germany (83M), and significantly less than France (68M), Italy (58M) and Spain (48M). 40 of those 50 states have fewer than 10M inhabitants.

        France (68M inhabitants) called elections on June 9, with the first round on June 30 and the second on July 7. They were over less than a month after being called. If France can do this with 68 million inhabitants then surely California can do it with only 36 million (let alone all those other smaller states).

        • Dearth@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          It’s the synchronization of 50 individual states that’s the trick. Countries with many states have slower bureaucracies. They don’t all have the same budget to organize elections. Sure, Florida Texas new York and California could probably do it fast. But Alaska or Wyoming?

          Colorado runs their elections in person in some of their smaller districts. The entire voting population meets at the school auditorium and debate and discuss until they can assign their electors to a candidate. It’s a tradition that’s as old as the state.

          Every state has unique needs and budgets to provide voting to their citizens. Some states make it easier for citizens to vote. Some make it harder. When planning a national election you must be considerate of the states that make it harder to vote.

          • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            We have EP elections, they represent more people than the US, elections have to be synchronized not just between states, but between sovereign countries (imagine dealing with France, Germany and Hungary at the same time), and they often go without a hitch with only a few months of campaigning.

            • Dearth@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Don’t they happen at regular intervals? Or is it always a case of the legislative announcing a popular vote is necessary and then everyone has a few months to prepare

              • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Yeah, they are regular, it’s just parties don’t really campaign for that long, campaign finance laws usually prohibit it by maximizing the amount of money that can be spent. You could theoretically campaign for 4 years, but you can’t do it with full intensity as you would run out of money, so parties save up for a big bang before the election, as it probably should be.

                That said, there are serious problems with EU electoral processes as well, it’s just that they are not fundamentally broken like the US. For example, Hungary’s ruling party routinely spends a ton of money on “government communication” that is not technically campaigning on paper just in practice, thus sidestepping campaign finance laws.