4 ms·

... no it isn't. If you have 35% support but everyone else is opposed, that's not enough to win elections.

lotsofpulp 1y ago
But everyone else isn't opposed. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2025/2024-presidential-election-voting-registration-tables.html https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2025/2024-pre... >In the 2024 presidential election, 73.6% (or 174 million people) of the citizen voting-age population was registered to vote and 65.3% (or 154 million people) voted according to new voting and registration tables released today by the U.S. Census Bureau. Moreover, due to the electoral college and Senate and gerrymandering of House districts, the majority is hardly needed for attain power. I bet that even in other societies, throughout time, roughly a third of the population will not react to what one of the other thirds is doing (even if they claim they don't approve in polls).
- sanderjd 1y ago
  I agree. This was my point. The 35% number is the strong support. But that is not enough. If they lose all their weak support, they lose.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
anigbrowl 1y ago
It demonstrably is, because of gerrymandering, electoral college, turnout manipulation etc.
- hparadiz 1y ago
  You only need PA, WI, and MI
  - sanderjd 1y ago
    If you only have 35% of the popular vote, you aren't going to win in the electoral college.
    - johnnyanmac 1y ago
      That's what happned in 2024, right? you're not accounting for the fact that 30-40% of the country does not vote in nationals.
      - sanderjd 1y ago
        No, it's not what happened... The election was not won with 35% of the popular vote... Again, if you insist on talking about "35% of people in the US" rather than "35% of voters", then fine, but I think it's a weird way to talk about it. We don't know what the people who didn't vote thought about the candidates. Voting is the way that we find that out!
        johnnyanmac 1y ago
        >if you insist on talking about "35% of people in the US" rather than "35% of voters", then fine, but I think it's a weird way to talk about it. When were talking about adhering to a dangerous status quo, the conversation makes sense. A status quo of boring beauracracy can be defendable. A status quo of fascism, much less so. Thars why conversations in 2025 are like this. Even then:remember Trump still had a 40% approval rating after all this.
- sanderjd 1y ago
  35% is still not enough, even given those issues.
distortionfield 1y ago
Most numbers I can find say that about 65% of Americans are registered to vote. Let’s say 100% of them voted in 2024. Of that, let’s call it a flat 51% voted for Trump. That means that about half of 65%, or roughly 32.5% of American citizens support Trump, and by extension, likely this policy move. So yes, it actually is more than you need to win elections.
- sanderjd 1y ago
  Oh hmm, if the 35% number is all Americans, then sure. But typically people are talking about percentages of voters with statistics like this.

But everyone else isn't opposed. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2025/2024-presidential-election-voting-registration-tables.html https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2025/2024-pre... >In the 2024 presidential election, 73.6% (or 174 million people) of the citizen voting-age population was registered to vote and 65.3% (or 154 million people) voted according to new voting and registration tables released today by the U.S. Census Bureau. Moreover, due to the electoral college and Senate and gerrymandering of House districts, the majority is hardly needed for attain power. I bet that even in other societies, throughout time, roughly a third of the population will not react to what one of the other thirds is doing (even if they claim they don't approve in polls).

sanderjd 1y ago
I agree. This was my point. The 35% number is the strong support. But that is not enough. If they lose all their weak support, they lose.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]

anigbrowl 1y ago

It demonstrably is, because of gerrymandering, electoral college, turnout manipulation etc.

hparadiz 1y ago
You only need PA, WI, and MI
- sanderjd 1y ago
  If you only have 35% of the popular vote, you aren't going to win in the electoral college.
  - johnnyanmac 1y ago
    That's what happned in 2024, right? you're not accounting for the fact that 30-40% of the country does not vote in nationals.
    - sanderjd 1y ago
      No, it's not what happened... The election was not won with 35% of the popular vote... Again, if you insist on talking about "35% of people in the US" rather than "35% of voters", then fine, but I think it's a weird way to talk about it. We don't know what the people who didn't vote thought about the candidates. Voting is the way that we find that out!
      - johnnyanmac 1y ago
        >if you insist on talking about "35% of people in the US" rather than "35% of voters", then fine, but I think it's a weird way to talk about it. When were talking about adhering to a dangerous status quo, the conversation makes sense. A status quo of boring beauracracy can be defendable. A status quo of fascism, much less so. Thars why conversations in 2025 are like this. Even then:remember Trump still had a 40% approval rating after all this.
sanderjd 1y ago
35% is still not enough, even given those issues.

distortionfield 1y ago

Most numbers I can find say that about 65% of Americans are registered to vote. Let’s say 100% of them voted in 2024. Of that, let’s call it a flat 51% voted for Trump. That means that about half of 65%, or roughly 32.5% of American citizens support Trump, and by extension, likely this policy move. So yes, it actually is more than you need to win elections.

sanderjd 1y ago
Oh hmm, if the 35% number is all Americans, then sure. But typically people are talking about percentages of voters with statistics like this.