Not All Votes Created Equal

Not All Votes Created Equal

There are 11 comments on the The Intelligencer story from Sep 29, 2012, titled Not All Votes Created Equal. In it, The Intelligencer reports that:

When it comes to electing the president, not all votes are created equal. And chances are yours will count less than those of a select few.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Intelligencer.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#1 Sep 29, 2012
Democrats shouldn't be allowed to vote in NJ after electing McGreevy and Corzine one after the other.
They don't possess the mental capacity to make informed decisions, evidently. That's the facts, Jack.
xnutmegger

Phoenix, AZ

#2 Sep 29, 2012
Why is LEFTY for protecting minority people but not states with less populations ?

Isn't protecting the least represented a Dem priority ?

We live in a Federal Republic Democracy not a monolithic Democracy.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#3 Sep 29, 2012
That's why we need to dump the electoral college. EVERY vote should count equally. Under the current system, if you're a Dem living in Kansas, your vote doesn't count; same if you're a Repube living in New York or California.

Because of the electoral college candidates only campaign in about a dozen states, because they know the rest are safely in one camp or the other. Get rid of the electoral college and the candidates would have to campaign in EVERY state for EVERY vote.

In addition, a voter in Wyoming (1 elector per 170k people) has almost 4 times the power of a voter in Texas (1 elector per 700k people).

Every vote should count equally. Maybe them more people would actually bother to vote.
xnutmegger

Phoenix, AZ

#4 Sep 29, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
That's why we need to dump the electoral college. EVERY vote should count equally. Under the current system, if you're a Dem living in Kansas, your vote doesn't count; same if you're a Repube living in New York or California.
Because of the electoral college candidates only campaign in about a dozen states, because they know the rest are safely in one camp or the other. Get rid of the electoral college and the candidates would have to campaign in EVERY state for EVERY vote.
In addition, a voter in Wyoming (1 elector per 170k people) has almost 4 times the power of a voter in Texas (1 elector per 700k people).
Every vote should count equally. Maybe them more people would actually bother to vote.
It's a Federal Repbulic and that's the way it should stay.

Parties could control the whole country with just 2 of 3 states driving the election cycle instead of more.

It would be a California and New York country with states like Ohio , Pa. and Indiana being near meaningless.Both sates could be kept happy with PORK and crony capitalism.

Even small NH is getting romanced which is good.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#5 Sep 29, 2012
xnutmegger wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a Federal Repbulic and that's the way it should stay.
Parties could control the whole country with just 2 of 3 states driving the election cycle instead of more.
It would be a California and New York country with states like Ohio , Pa. and Indiana being near meaningless.Both sates could be kept happy with PORK and crony capitalism.
Even small NH is getting romanced which is good.
B.S.

Just look at the population distribution of the US. A candidate would have to win 100% of the vote in the top 10 states most populous states to win the election.

Again, ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of the vote in CA,TX,NY,FL,IL,PA,OH,MI, GA,& NC to get 50%+ of the total vote to win the presidency.

Do you really think ANY candidate on EITHER side can get 100% of the vote in all those states?

Notice anything about those top 10 states? They also include 5 of the main "battleground" states where the candidates are spending all their time this year- FL, OH, PA, MI, NC.

So much for the electoral college meaning the candidates won't just concentrate on winning just a couple of states.......
xnutmegger

Phoenix, AZ

#6 Sep 29, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
B.S.
Just look at the population distribution of the US. A candidate would have to win 100% of the vote in the top 10 states most populous states to win the election.
Again, ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of the vote in CA,TX,NY,FL,IL,PA,OH,MI, GA,& NC to get 50%+ of the total vote to win the presidency.
Do you really think ANY candidate on EITHER side can get 100% of the vote in all those states?
Notice anything about those top 10 states? They also include 5 of the main "battleground" states where the candidates are spending all their time this year- FL, OH, PA, MI, NC.
So much for the electoral college meaning the candidates won't just concentrate on winning just a couple of states.......
Not a 100% but 65-70% in a few biggies and then coast for plus or minus 1-2-3% in the rest. NY, Ca, Pa and Il. as examples of high Dem and just cruise in the others.

It's actaully the urban vote vs. everything else or about 6-7-8 major cities.City folk cannot feed themselves but they don't know that. City folk cannot create enough energy to be self-sufficient but they don't know that. They forget when they go to the polls.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#7 Sep 29, 2012
xnutmegger wrote:
<quoted text>
Not a 100% but 65-70% in a few biggies and then coast for plus or minus 1-2-3% in the rest. NY, Ca, Pa and Il. as examples of high Dem and just cruise in the others.
It's actaully the urban vote vs. everything else or about 6-7-8 major cities.City folk cannot feed themselves but they don't know that. City folk cannot create enough energy to be self-sufficient but they don't know that. They forget when they go to the polls.
Nope, that doesn't work either.

A candidate would have to get 100% of the vote in ALL 285 cities with a population over 100,000 just to get 50%+ of the vote and be elected.

Again, that would be ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of the votes in ALL 285 cities with a population over 100,000 just to get 50%+ of the vote.

That includes those "big city folks" in Broken Arrow, OK (pop 100,073) and Centennial, CO (pop 102,603) and Denton, TX (pop 117,187).

The numbers don't lie, but those who oppose a popular vote DO lie.

Going to a popular vote would ensure candidates would HAVE to campaign EVERYWHERE across the country, urban AND rural.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#8 Sep 30, 2012
And the gubmint news marches on.
conservative crapola

Bethlehem, PA

#9 Sep 30, 2012
So when the teabooger taliban is rendered insignificant, it's the msm's fault.
hahahahahahahaha

Americans don't like the boogers.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#10 Sep 30, 2012
When Romney loses this year, I can GUARANTEE the next target for the GOPasaurs will be to end all the early voting which typically favors the Dems 2-1.

Remember you heard it here first.
August

Belleview, FL

#11 Sep 30, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
That's why we need to dump the electoral college. EVERY vote should count equally.
Every vote should count equally. Maybe them more people would actually bother to vote.
I don't normally agree with you but in this case, I think you're 100% correct. The electoral college needs to go!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Wyoming Government Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Wyoming's top court weighs judge's same-sex mar... (Aug '16) Oct '16 sir_tux 6
News Body found in Wyoming ID'd as Colorado woman (May '16) May '16 ELISE 1
News U.S. 85 now open at Colorado-Wyoming border; no... (Apr '16) Apr '16 wellwhoopy 1
News Record Number of Eye Donors Leads to Record Num... (Feb '16) Feb '16 Elise 3
News Federal coal sales moratorium shakes industry s... (Feb '16) Feb '16 EMMALYN 1
Harassing Emails and Letters from State Employee (Aug '15) Aug '15 anonymous 1
News Republican Wyoming on board with federal sage g... (May '15) May '15 Sterkfontein Swar... 2
More from around the web