Tolerance isn ' t relevant here . It ' s true that the meaning of moderation varies from person to person , but that doesn ' t change the fact that this is comparing apples and oranges . I ' ve thrown up twice from drinking , and twice from smoking . It ' s about knowing your limits . I ' ve seen people green out from one bong rip , too . but that doesn ' t fit the antialcohol narrative this post is trying to promote . Responsible use is responsible use . <| sep |> The Institutional Review Board primarily focuses on the ethics of the proposed study to limit the harm done to people or animals . IRB approval means that it has passed an ethics review . It doesn ' t necessarily mean that it is good or bad science . <| sep |> Here is an excerpt from Federalist 68 The process of election affords a moral certainty , that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications . Talents for low intrigue , and the little arts of popularity , may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State but it will require other talents , and a different kind of merit , to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union , or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States . It will not be too strong to say , that there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters preeminent for ability and virtue . And this will be thought no inconsiderable recommendation of the Constitution , by those who are able to estimate the share which the executive in every government must necessarily have in its good or ill administration . Though we cannot acquiesce in the political heresy of the poet who says For forms of government let fools contest That which is best administered is best , '' yet we may safely pronounce , that the true test of a good government is its aptitude and tendency to produce a good administration . How is the will of the people usurped as a whole , if the candidate with the most votes wins ? Fedralist 68 argues that a candidate shouldn ' t win by simply appealing to the will of the people . Hamilton didn ' t want the executive to be a contest of emotional appeal , which is exactly what the election was in 2016 . Trump won the election by 50 , 000 votes in three states in the Midwest . That three states decided the election goes against your argument as well . If Hamilton and Madison wanted the Electoral College to protect small states , then why would they make it based on Congressional representation ? That is , in fact , proportional representation .