If you want kids there’s a few things to consider.

1. Graduate highschool then get married before kids.
2. Kids are physically easier when you’re younger.
3. No one is ever really ready for kids, but you should have some level of financial stability and be prepared to have significantly less freedom.

Be purposeful in what you spend money on. You don’t need the best of everything, especially when starting a new hobby. You can find someone spending absurd amounts on anything, but no one can do that on everything.

Also, most green houses have fans that can help circulate air in from the exterior.

That’s equally hypothetical, winning the ~36 smallest states by a single vote and getting no other votes.

The system is fine, the cap is too small, but that could be fixed, and much more easily than making a new system.

Sure in theory if only a single person voted in the 12 largest states you could win that way, but that’s not really possible.

The apportionment formula is straightforward, you can find calculators to see what would happen as more representatives gets added. It’s not magic.

Makes sense, having all the votes over about a month would be convenient.

You need a way to ensure the presidental candidate is popular across many states, because that’s part of the election. Straight popular vote can easily skew to a candidate that wins a few states by a large margin, but ultimately loses the election.

Straight popular vote for a candidate is a great way to almost guarantee losses for the electoral college.

The low limit on the house is a problem for representation in general, but it doesn’t change the presidential election much. Trump would have still won the election if there were 800 representatives in the house, though it would have been closer.

The popular vote is irrelevant for the presidency, so your proving my point by bringing it up. It’s not relevant to the rules of the election.

The rules are get 270 electoral votes, not get the most votes. This generally requires winning the majority of states.

So they plan to kill super delegates?

Crazy idea. What if the Democratic primary was actually a democracy? Let the candidate who wins the most states with an electoral weight be the candidate.

Why? because it feels better to say the system is rigged than admit Democrats sold out the working class across the country and are reaping the benefits?

Just the house is powerful if the Democrats are brave. They can force concessions on bills, continue investigating corrupt bullshit, and impeach judges and cabinet members (Trump himself probably isn’t a good idea). A 51-49 Senate looks a lot different when Republicans are facing a post Trump world. Trump can pardon people, but that doesn’t prevent removal from office or impeachment trials.

This is a boring narrative. The system isn’t stacked in favor of the GOP, it’s stacked in favor of parties that play by the actual rules. If a party can’t make a compelling message to multiple different states, it’s on them.

Even just the 10 provinces would be a big change.

If Canada joined as multiple states it would be interesting…

You could probably grind the penguins into something useful.

The endangered species act actually needs some updates. As it stands, it incentivizes people who discover an endangered species on their land to shovel and shut up rather than conservation.