The United States of Apathy

[ObamaPhoneLady]

It was part of a continuing discussion. His response was an out of context "whataboutism".

Oh grow up.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

the Cali part actually makes sense
I don't know like any right leaning people in Cali that vote for President, b/c why?

 

[Seano]

That'll tell em.

But seriously, of course everybody should go cast their vote even if they know it will not effect the election. But it's also easy to understand how some people have lost their motivation to vote when they live in a state where the outcome is inevitable either way.

We split our vote up here in Maine. One electoral vote went to Trump. Pretty sure we're the only state that does that.

Maybe our way would be a better representation for the electoral college and popular vote.

 

[HockeyBjj]

Get your eyes checked, bud. Or maybe work on your Geography.

You're mixing up New Mexico with Arizona.

..... I’m good at math. Bad at maps.

 

[2DUM2TAP]

Well when the options were Giant Douche versus Turd Sandwhich what do you expect?

 

[HockeyBjj]

Stop projecting. I'm not outraged. I think it's hilarious that people actually believe the Russians needed to socially engineer Americans to stay home when our own MSM was telling us for months that Trump couldn't win.

Me thinking Clinton had it in the bag led me to simply vote R for the Congress and Senate seats when normally I’m more split. I just wanted people in to stall out the Obama “progressive” continuation

Now that Trump won, instead I voted for some BJ Penn level Yes men. Damnit.

 

[nac386]

We split our vote up here in Maine. One electoral vote went to Trump. Pretty sure we're the only state that does that.

Maybe our way would be a better representation for the electoral college and popular vote.

That could be true.

 

[Seano]

That could be true.

It could make it so certain states get true representation by county/district etc.

If a county in California votes red, then that counties votes should reflect that in the electorate (and vice versa).

 

[Don Quixote]

I’m surprised to see that concentration of blue in Alabama.

 

[nac386]

It could make it so certain states get true representation by county/district etc.

If a county in California votes red, then that counties votes should reflect that in the electorate (and vice versa).

The more accurately the election represents the will of the people, the better in my opinion.

But then that inevitably takes you towards just using the popular vote where everybody's vote counts evenly. It is strange to think that if your candidate loses your state, it means your vote meant nothing in the end. Moving it to a county-level would help some, but then you still run into the same situation on a smaller scale.

 

[CubicleGangster]

..... I’m good at math. Bad at maps.

I'd take math proficiency over map proficiency any day

 

[tonni]

In many ways? Like what?

Like very many ways

 

[tonni]

Oh grow up.

But you're a Nigel fan?

 

[Andy Capp]

I’m surprised to see that concentration of blue in Alabama.

You shouldn't. That would be a consequence of gerrymandering, most likely. In order to offset the areas where the gerrymanders have given themselves just the edge they need to win the area (district, state, whatever) there will be a big out of place blob of support for the other side, but still not enough to win. This is going to cost them if there is a sudden swing of support from one party to another. Let me emphasize "most likely". There are bound to be other explanations, but it does match what we expect to see when large portions of the country have been gerrymandered to the Nth degree.

Edit: If you look at the map, isn't it interesting that except in the largest and most populous states, that support for either party appears to be contiguous? Why aren't there bits here and there all over?

 

[Seano]

The more accurately the election represents the will of the people, the better in my opinion.

But then that inevitably takes you towards just using the popular vote where everybody's vote counts evenly. It is strange to think that if your candidate loses your state, it means your vote meant nothing in the end. Moving it to a county-level would help some, but then you still run into the same situation on a smaller scale.

Well, like I said, 1 vote up here went to Trump and I think it made people think they made a difference.

 

[ObamaPhoneLady]

But you're a Nigel fan?

You're a comic book movies fan so...

 

[tonni]

You're a comic book movies fan so...

False

 

[Revolver]

We need to ditch the electoral college, and have a national popular vote. I guarantee that would increase voter turnout, because every vote would actually count. A shocking idea, I know.

This. Flyover states shouldn't determine anything.

 

[Fawlty]

So why the hell do you guys keep using this retarded electoral system?

Because there is not sufficient popular or legislative support for amending our Constitution. I don't think the argument is close to being decided yet.

According to Gallup 2 years ago, opinion may even be moving back toward popular support for the Electoral College http://news.gallup.com/poll/198917/americans-support-electoral-college-rises-sharply.aspx (and a lot depends on how the question is posed). Different political climates can also get different results.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

We need to ditch the electoral college, and have a national popular vote.

I'd go the other way and have state Governors or legislatures decide. Can we vote on it?