Let's put it this way. A resident of South Dakota has 70x the voting power as a Californian resident in determining fed judicial appointments as the US Senate has the final say in them. So the federal court system will always disproportionately favor more rural sparce regions.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...-gop-2024-presidential-race-poll/10882346002/ While Biden now leads Trump, he trails DeSantis in a head-to-head race, with DeSantis at 47%, Biden at 43%.
Does a Republic inherently mean that people with land have more say in how society is run? Is that the definition of a Republic to you? Because that more closely resembles fudalism.
If not stated already, I'm guessing DACA would end. Also would probably have a return to Trumpian "deport everyone ICE encounters" instead of the Obama/Bush/Clinton/Bush/Reagan executive policies of deporting high priority criminals first and then so on down the line by the criteria established by each administration.
this problem is solved by the bicameral legislature, and the differing ways those chambers are selected.
Not really. As our federal court system has overwhelming disproportionate conservative representation precisely because rural conservative states have the same amount of votes as NY in approving federal judicial appointments.
In other news, Trump threatened to build a prison next to Disney if they don't do what he wants. Sorry, did I say Trump? I meant DeSantis.