3 ms·

If people voted for any of those things, there would be quite a different margin. So then, what DO people vote for?

pm90 6y ago
People do vote for these things, but if you split voters is a particular way you can ensure that the minority hold on to power (Gerrymandering and the Electoral College).
- taurath 6y ago
  If you're looking at a 60/40 split though, even the extreme levels of gerrymandering can't override it. So what are the other things that people vote for - they must have a large rightward split if people keep voting right wing, in the face of all those left-leaning polls on policies.
  - pm90 6y ago
    That’s not how elections work in the US, 60/40 is not a big enough divide to undo a gerrymander. The majority of the liberal population lives in dense urban areas and thus their votes get “wasted” as they’re reliably Democrats, while sparser regions which consist of the minority view get more representation compared to their actual numbers. Add to that the fact that many voters are single issue voters, so their opinions on different policies don’t end up amounting to much. So even if some policies are popular overall, they need to be popular enough to overcome these things to form a durable coalition that advocates for them in the halls of power.
8note 6y ago
Is it relevant what people do vote for? Getting the most votes isn't what translates to forming a government in the US. The big things are: having your family members run state governments, setting district lines, and setting up laws to prevent people that disagree with you from voting. Not to mention just having a lot of money to bribe already elected politicians.
- taurath 6y ago
  As an absolute leftist, I think you're overstating the effects of gerrymandering. State gerrymandering cannot win statewide seats, nor the electoral college. Anti-voting regulations, while frankly absolutely despicable, I've not yet seen any studies regarding a significant effect. Do you have any data on that?

pm90 6y ago

People do vote for these things, but if you split voters is a particular way you can ensure that the minority hold on to power (Gerrymandering and the Electoral College).

taurath 6y ago
If you're looking at a 60/40 split though, even the extreme levels of gerrymandering can't override it. So what are the other things that people vote for - they must have a large rightward split if people keep voting right wing, in the face of all those left-leaning polls on policies.
- pm90 6y ago
  That’s not how elections work in the US, 60/40 is not a big enough divide to undo a gerrymander. The majority of the liberal population lives in dense urban areas and thus their votes get “wasted” as they’re reliably Democrats, while sparser regions which consist of the minority view get more representation compared to their actual numbers. Add to that the fact that many voters are single issue voters, so their opinions on different policies don’t end up amounting to much. So even if some policies are popular overall, they need to be popular enough to overcome these things to form a durable coalition that advocates for them in the halls of power.

8note 6y ago

Is it relevant what people do vote for? Getting the most votes isn't what translates to forming a government in the US. The big things are: having your family members run state governments, setting district lines, and setting up laws to prevent people that disagree with you from voting. Not to mention just having a lot of money to bribe already elected politicians.

taurath 6y ago
As an absolute leftist, I think you're overstating the effects of gerrymandering. State gerrymandering cannot win statewide seats, nor the electoral college. Anti-voting regulations, while frankly absolutely despicable, I've not yet seen any studies regarding a significant effect. Do you have any data on that?