Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And it shouldn't either. GOP needs to gain power with Trump and never let it go. The genocide of actual AMERICANS is happening with democrats inviting non American people in and loading them up with freebies in exchange for votes.
^ this is the exact sort of ignorant thinking that is going to doom the GOP. When Hillary Clinton wins the election and liberals get 16 years of uninterrupted "change" it will be due to this sort of thinking. 90% White America is NEVER coming back. Deal with it, adapt, evolve, sing a new tune.
Location: Big Island of Hawaii & HOT BuOYS Sailing Vessel
5,277 posts, read 2,800,352 times
Reputation: 1932
Quote:
Originally Posted by WIHS2006
Good chart, thanks for posting this!
Several months ago I was looking for something like this to make a point about why the GOP should look to expand beyond it's regular base (the Deep South and rural Western states).
10 most Democratic leaning states = 160 EC votes
10 most Republican leaning states = 53 EC votes
See why the GOP needs to evolve and adapt with the changing times and demographics?
^ this is the exact sort of ignorant thinking that is going to doom the GOP. When Hillary Clinton wins the election and liberals get 16 years of uninterrupted "change" it will be due to this sort of thinking. 90% White America is NEVER coming back. Deal with it, adapt, evolve, sing a new tune.
16 years of that evil B and the country will collapse. Then we will TAKE our country back. We are tired of expecting useless politicians and democrap voting invaders streaming across our borders to MY country that MY founding fathers made for their progeny NOT the worlds dumping ground for its garbage.
16 years of that evil B and the country will collapse. Then we will TAKE our country back. We are tired of expecting useless politicians and democrap voting invaders streaming across our borders to MY country that MY founding fathers made for their progeny NOT the worlds dumping ground for its garbage.
The Timothy McVeigh suite at the Colorado Supermax is probably within the grasp of you and your militia buddies if you put your minds to it.
Should do away with popular vote. Just have candidates win by most Electoral votes. A State earns 1 EV fo every 125,000 residents. EVs are distributed by percentage of votes wonot for that candidate in that State or Territory. Most EVs win the Election.
Should do away with popular vote. Just have candidates win by most Electoral votes. A State earns 1 EV fo every 125,000 residents. EVs are distributed by percentage of votes wonot for that candidate in that State or Territory. Most EVs win the Election.
Might as well have it done by Popular Vote. In a lot of states, 1/2 the voters voted for a candidate who received none of their vote, while the candidate they didn't vote for get their vote anyway.
The intention was to keep a lid on the tyranny of the majority, but who's to say elected leaders are any smarter than the rest of them? I know a few legislators, they aren't geniuses by any measure.
Should do away with popular vote. Just have candidates win by most Electoral votes. A State earns 1 EV fo every 125,000 residents. EVs are distributed by percentage of votes wonot for that candidate in that State or Territory. Most EVs win the Election.
I like it the way it is. It take some rudimentary analysis to figure out why the system we have in place is far superior than any other yet devised. It's complex but it manages to factor in all the elements that can account for unbalanced voting results and corrects for them.
I sincerely apologize for this delayed response, as I did not have an opportunity to post until now.
Quote:
Interesting thread. Here's another take on Electoral College votes over time - the top ten states, every 20 years since 1800:
1800:
VA - 21
MA - 16
PA - 15
NC, NY - 12 each
1820:
NY - 29
VA - 25
PA - 24
MA, NC - 15 each
1840:
NY - 42
PA - 30
VA - 23
KY, NC, TN - 15 each
1860:
NY - 35
PA - 27
OH - 23
VA - 15
IN, MA - 13 each
1880:
NY - 35
PA - 29
OH - 22
IL - 21
MO - 15
1900:
NY - 36
PA - 32
IL - 24
OH - 23
MO - 17
1920:
NY - 45
PA - 38
IL - 29
OH - 24
TX - 20
1940:
NY - 47
PA - 36
IL - 29
OH - 26
TX - 23
1960:
NY - 45
CA, PA - 32 each
IL - 27
OH - 25
1980:
CA - 45
NY - 41
PA - 27
IL, TX - 26 each
2000:
CA - 54
NY - 33
TX - 32
FL - 25
PA - 23
As can be seen, Virginia started atop the heap but soon lost the top spot to New York; it's no longer even in the top ten. By 1840 it was New York and Pennsylvania and #1 and #2, which would hold for over a century. Ohio and Illinois also ensconced themselves in the top five in the 19th century; Pennsylvania is still there, barely, for now. Texas, easily the second state now, didn't make the top five until 1920. It was briefly dislodged by California in 1960 before reentering in 1980. California came out of nowhere to tie for second in 1960, then grab the top spot from New York twenty years later. Florida didn't squeeze its way into the top five until 2000.
Looking ahead, the top four seem pretty fixed in the following order for some time to come. Florida will continue to pull away from New York, but Texas is far ahead and growing. California is not growing as fast, but still has an enormous lead. Meanwhile, New York is well ahead of whatever state(s) emerge in fifth place.
2020 [projected, see link below]:
CA - 55
TX - 41
FL - 31
NY - 28
IL, PA - 19 each
This is a fascinating analysis, Unsettomati. I never knew that VA was once the most populous state.
Upon doing some additional research, 1962 was the year when CA surpassed NY to become #1 in population. NY remained #2 until 1994, when it was surpassed by TX. And it was only in 2014 when FL overtook NY in population.
Quote:
Look at it per capita:
Population/Electoral Votes.
The larger states get screwed.
ie:
California has 1 electoral vote for every 677,344 persons
Wyoming has 1 electoral vote for every 187,875 persons
per capita State
677,345 California
668,210 New York
661,725 Texas
648,321 Florida
641,532 Illinois
640,917 Ohio
635,699 North Carolina
635,119 Pennsylvania
627,992 New Jersey
617,728 Michigan
615,463 Virginia
605,478 Georgia
598,893 Missouri
595,239 Massachusetts
589,437 Indiana
581,092 Arizona
577,355 Maryland
576,919 Tennessee
568,699 Wisconsin
566,672 Louisiana
560,378 Washington
558,800 Colorado
547,296 Oregon
542,421 Kentucky
535,907 Oklahoma
531,082 Alabama
530,393 Minnesota
513,929 South Carolina
510,585 Connecticut
507,726 Iowa
494,550 Mississippi
485,986 Arkansas
475,520 Kansas
460,648 Utah
450,092 Nevada
411,836 New Mexico
391,896 Idaho
370,599 West Virginia
365,268 Nebraska
340,075 Hawaii
332,090 Maine
329,805 Montana
329,118 New Hampshire
299,311 Delaware
271,393 South Dakota
263,142 Rhode Island
236,744 Alaska
224,197 North Dakota
208,580 Vermont
187,875 Wyoming
Thanks for sharing these figures. The main reason why smaller states benefit as a result of the electoral college is because the number of electoral votes allotted to each state is equal to its number of senators plus its number of representatives. Since each state--regardless of population--elects two senators, states which have fewer representatives (and hence have less population) stand to benefit the most from this formula. For instance, if a state's number of electoral votes were only equal to the number of Congressmen allotted to it, CA would still have 53 electoral votes while WY would have only 1 electoral vote. By "bumping up" these numbers by 2, CA gets 55 electoral votes (an increase of just 3.8%) while WY gets 3 electoral votes (an increase of 200%).
Because smaller states benefit much more from the Electoral College, I think that a fairer way to do things would be to simply have each state's electoral votes be equal to just the number of Congressman that it elects. IMO, this would be a good compromise between the current formula (for determining each state's electoral votes) and eliminating the Electoral College altogether (and electing the president based solely on the popular vote). I am not in favor of the complete elimination of the Electoral College, because were that to occur, small states like IA, NH, & NV would be totally ignored in presidential elections.
Last edited by Dole-McCain Republican; 09-18-2016 at 02:34 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
^ this is the exact sort of ignorant thinking that is going to doom the GOP. When Hillary Clinton wins the election and liberals get 16 years of uninterrupted "change" it will be due to this sort of thinking. 90% White America is NEVER coming back. Deal with it, adapt, evolve, sing a new tune.
Then we will TAKE our country back. We are tired of expecting useless politicians and democrap voting invaders streaming across our borders to MY country that MY founding fathers made for their progeny NOT the worlds dumping ground for its garbage.
