ToughDiamond wrote:
I live in the USA, and have to pay local taxes to a degree, and purchase tax in full, but they don't let me vote because I'm only a Green Card holder so far. So I'm taking the liberty of posting here, and I'll desist if the OP politely asks me to.
So although I don't think American politics are none of my business, I'm not unduly concerned, because I live in a strongly Republican, Trump-supporting state, so there's no chance of my vote making any practical difference. If I understand it right, one House is elected by proportional representation and the other is by "first-past-the-post," in which case my vote wouldn't count for absolutely nothing, but even so, the USA population is so huge that my expressed preference would be diluted to a homeopathic level. It's much more effective to vote where parties are neck-and-neck, but does anybody have the right to wield disproportionate power? Of course it only matters if the voter thinks there's any appreciable difference between the parties.
Long story short, I don't think I'd have voted this time even if I'd been allowed to.
Neither The House of Representatives nor The Senate are elected by proportional representation. The main difference between the two is the House is based on districts that contain a certain amount of people (or the entire state if there are few enough people). Where as, the Senate is a state wide position and each state has two with only up to one up for election at a time. Originally, Senators where not elected directly by voters and were in were chosen by state government.