4 ms·

As a resident of a state deemed "flyover country" let me just key all you California residents in on something you may not know: if you get rid of the electoral

As a resident of a state deemed "flyover country" let me just key all you California residents in on something you may not know: if you get rid of the electoral college you also get rid of the consent of the Midwest to be in the union. We refuse to be dictated policy by a bunch of coastal high population states that can't even keep human feces off their major cities streets. Getting rid of the electoral college is a good way to start a civil war.

athriren 7y ago
California had 4.5 million Republican presidential votes cast in 2016, more than the total votes cast in 41 states (in other words, more than all but 9 states, one of which is California itself). [0] Many of these voters live in the Central Valley, which grows much of the crops produced in the United States (over a third of the country's vegetables and two-thirds of the country's fruits and nuts). [1] If you throw in the over 3 million Republican presidential votes cast in New York, the current system disenfranchises as many Republicans in 2 states as 30% of total votes cast in the 11 Midwest states won by the Republican. I understand the impulse to push back against the coasts, as someone originally from the Midwest and is trying to move back there, but the electoral college is not a good system. It harms as many people as it helps. Voters in ~10 “swing states” get bombarded with ads and visits, while the rest of the country gets (comparatively) ignored. Incidentally, I don’t really think the popular vote is a great system either, particularly in historical examples of no candidate winning a majority of the votes. I would much prefer a system like instant runoff where voters rank candidates based on preference. [2] The Wikipedia hole on electoral methods is a fun read for anyone interested. [3] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election#Results_by_state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidentia... [1] http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/Statistics/ http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/Statistics/ [2] https://www.fairvote.org https://www.fairvote.org [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method
- rufus_3 7y ago
  It's a good system for those who believe the country is in better hands when we weigh the votes of those in rural areas and still connected to the land as more important than the votes of those who dwell in the nihilism-inducing urban centers.
- Fjolsvith 7y ago
  So those soldiers would be behind enemy lines.

athriren 7y ago

California had 4.5 million Republican presidential votes cast in 2016, more than the total votes cast in 41 states (in other words, more than all but 9 states, one of which is California itself). [0] Many of these voters live in the Central Valley, which grows much of the crops produced in the United States (over a third of the country's vegetables and two-thirds of the country's fruits and nuts). [1] If you throw in the over 3 million Republican presidential votes cast in New York, the current system disenfranchises as many Republicans in 2 states as 30% of total votes cast in the 11 Midwest states won by the Republican. I understand the impulse to push back against the coasts, as someone originally from the Midwest and is trying to move back there, but the electoral college is not a good system. It harms as many people as it helps. Voters in ~10 “swing states” get bombarded with ads and visits, while the rest of the country gets (comparatively) ignored. Incidentally, I don’t really think the popular vote is a great system either, particularly in historical examples of no candidate winning a majority of the votes. I would much prefer a system like instant runoff where voters rank candidates based on preference. [2] The Wikipedia hole on electoral methods is a fun read for anyone interested. [3] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election#Results_by_state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidentia... [1] http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/Statistics/ http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/Statistics/ [2] https://www.fairvote.org https://www.fairvote.org [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method

rufus_3 7y ago
It's a good system for those who believe the country is in better hands when we weigh the votes of those in rural areas and still connected to the land as more important than the votes of those who dwell in the nihilism-inducing urban centers.
Fjolsvith 7y ago
So those soldiers would be behind enemy lines.