4 ms·

Fun fact, Trump carried more states in 2016 (30) than Obama carried in 2008 (28). Our country is so polarized that pretty much all elections are close. https:

Fun fact, Trump carried more states in 2016 (30) than Obama carried in 2008 (28). Our country is so polarized that pretty much all elections are close. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_ele... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2016 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_ele...

dfee 9y ago
Polarization and margin of victory are orthogonal concepts, and certainly not linked by causation.
elgenie 9y ago
States aren't a particularly meaningful counting unit: California encompasses more than 68 Wyomings by population. And the meaning of "carrying" a state by a 44.1% to 44.0% plurality is questionable. The current division in the US is urban vs rural, with turnout differences and suburbs deciding elections.
- paulddraper 9y ago
  Number of states is indeed misleading. If each party gets half the states, it's a Democrat victory. E.g. Carter carries 24 states and Ford carries 27; Carter wins 297-240.
  - paulddraper 9y ago
    I'm really confused by the downvotes. This is the material evidence of > The current division in the US is urban vs rural I.e. you have to look at populations of states, not just state counts themselves.
    - brianzelip 9y ago
      Maybe you got down voted because 24 + 27 != 50?
      - grzm 9y ago
        Likely 'paulddraper is using 24 to mean 23 states + DC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1976 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_ele... (The election even included a faithless elector, something you don't see every day.)
        paulddraper 9y ago
        Indeed. It was a vote by a Republican for the Libertarian nomination. It was also notable for being the first electoral vote for a ticket with a woman.
      - dragonwriter 9y ago
        D.C. is usually counted as a state in discussion of Presidential elections since it was alotted electors under the 23rd Amendment. (This actually comports with a common practice in federal statute law where any of the federal territories that are treated equal to a state in the particular law are simply lumped into the law’s particular definition of “state”, which is then used to refer to actual stated plus the equivalent-to-state territories in the context of that law.)
- noobermin 9y ago
  It doesn't matter, the US presidential election isn't very representative, it values some groups' votes more than others.
grzm 9y ago
Just as relevant as the popular vote in determining the outcome of an election based on the electoral college.
raarts 9y ago
> Our country is so polarized that pretty much all elections are close Which is to be expected in a two party system.
- jdavis703 9y ago
  The national party apparatuses should be able to find a way to have moderating voices. Most large cities in the U.S. are a one party system dominated by Democrats. Yet if you look at the politicians who are mayors and council members, there's a lot of diversity in ideas and bitter policy disputes.
  - na85 9y ago
    Surely that is because cities are diverse and multicultural, something that the GOP has been trying to cast as a negative since at least Reagan.
    - jiggliemon 9y ago
      Citation needed.
      - jdavis703 9y ago
        Let's not turn this in to a pointless political debate. But stories such as the Republican appointee to the DoI saying "diversity isn't important" [0] lead some people to conclude that there's effort to cast other goals as more important than diversity. There are enough threads on HN debating the relative merits of diversity and meritocracy that there's no need to add them here, but this is just an answer to the citation request. 0: https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/26/politics/ryan-zinke-diversity/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/26/politics/ryan-zinke-diversity...
        the_trapper 9y ago
        Is he really wrong though? What purpose does artificially created diversity serve? Shouldn't we always be looking for the best qualified individuals? The goal should always be equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 9y ago
> Our country is so polarized that pretty much all elections are close. I assume you mean pretty much all Presidential elections (because otherwise it's not true; lots of elections aren't close, and some electoral districts are so structurally guaranteed to be not close that elections are usually uncontested), but even then polarization does nothing to explain that, but the incentive to seek a winning coalition with minimal compromise on issues in a two-party system does.
specialist 9y ago
Duverger's Law is why FPTP elections are close.

dfee 9y ago

Polarization and margin of victory are orthogonal concepts, and certainly not linked by causation.

elgenie 9y ago

States aren't a particularly meaningful counting unit: California encompasses more than 68 Wyomings by population. And the meaning of "carrying" a state by a 44.1% to 44.0% plurality is questionable. The current division in the US is urban vs rural, with turnout differences and suburbs deciding elections.

paulddraper 9y ago
Number of states is indeed misleading. If each party gets half the states, it's a Democrat victory. E.g. Carter carries 24 states and Ford carries 27; Carter wins 297-240.
- paulddraper 9y ago
  I'm really confused by the downvotes. This is the material evidence of > The current division in the US is urban vs rural I.e. you have to look at populations of states, not just state counts themselves.
  - brianzelip 9y ago
    Maybe you got down voted because 24 + 27 != 50?
    - grzm 9y ago
      Likely 'paulddraper is using 24 to mean 23 states + DC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1976 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_ele... (The election even included a faithless elector, something you don't see every day.)
      - paulddraper 9y ago
        Indeed. It was a vote by a Republican for the Libertarian nomination. It was also notable for being the first electoral vote for a ticket with a woman.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      D.C. is usually counted as a state in discussion of Presidential elections since it was alotted electors under the 23rd Amendment. (This actually comports with a common practice in federal statute law where any of the federal territories that are treated equal to a state in the particular law are simply lumped into the law’s particular definition of “state”, which is then used to refer to actual stated plus the equivalent-to-state territories in the context of that law.)
noobermin 9y ago
It doesn't matter, the US presidential election isn't very representative, it values some groups' votes more than others.

grzm 9y ago

Just as relevant as the popular vote in determining the outcome of an election based on the electoral college.

raarts 9y ago

> Our country is so polarized that pretty much all elections are close Which is to be expected in a two party system.

jdavis703 9y ago
The national party apparatuses should be able to find a way to have moderating voices. Most large cities in the U.S. are a one party system dominated by Democrats. Yet if you look at the politicians who are mayors and council members, there's a lot of diversity in ideas and bitter policy disputes.
- na85 9y ago
  Surely that is because cities are diverse and multicultural, something that the GOP has been trying to cast as a negative since at least Reagan.
  - jiggliemon 9y ago
    Citation needed.
    - jdavis703 9y ago
      Let's not turn this in to a pointless political debate. But stories such as the Republican appointee to the DoI saying "diversity isn't important" [0] lead some people to conclude that there's effort to cast other goals as more important than diversity. There are enough threads on HN debating the relative merits of diversity and meritocracy that there's no need to add them here, but this is just an answer to the citation request. 0: https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/26/politics/ryan-zinke-diversity/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/26/politics/ryan-zinke-diversity...
      - the_trapper 9y ago
        Is he really wrong though? What purpose does artificially created diversity serve? Shouldn't we always be looking for the best qualified individuals? The goal should always be equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

dragonwriter 9y ago

> Our country is so polarized that pretty much all elections are close. I assume you mean pretty much all Presidential elections (because otherwise it's not true; lots of elections aren't close, and some electoral districts are so structurally guaranteed to be not close that elections are usually uncontested), but even then polarization does nothing to explain that, but the incentive to seek a winning coalition with minimal compromise on issues in a two-party system does.

specialist 9y ago

Duverger's Law is why FPTP elections are close.