• The KillerFrogs

The Harris/Biden Administration: Coming Together to Build Back Better

HFrog1999

Member
Not me. I go for the 1.75 every time.

That’s the kind of smart money management ideas we need in these inflationary times

The One Where Estelle Dies Episode 15 GIF by Friends
 
Last edited:

Paul in uhh

Active Member

ft_2022.08.05_electoralcollege_01.png


Overall fairly steady, but I am kinda surprised Republicans have been trending steadily up since 2016, up to 42% versus 27% in 2016. I guess it is more that there was a big decrease in Republicans supporting popular vote after the 2016 election that has now regressed to the mean a bit over time.
Because most people live in cities now.
 
It does in exactly the same way that Congress does. Each state has the same number of electors as spots in Congress (except that DC has electors but no voting congressional representation). So each stage gets an automatic two, then the rest are based on population.
Yeah that's a good point. That does decrease the power of the big states slightly, although not nearly as much as the Senate. That is where the small states get a huge boost in power. 81% of the electoral college power is based on population so it track population pretty well. Wyoming has .17% of the population, .23% of the house votes, .56% of the electoral votes and 2% of the Senate votes. Nevada has .92% of the population, .92% of the house votes, 1.1% of the electoral college votes and 2% of the Senate votes. Indiana has 2.02% of the population, 2.07% of the house votes, 2.04% of the electoral college votes and 2% of the Senate votes. Texas has 8.68% of the population, 8.7% of house votes (after it gains 2), 7.4% of the electoral college votes and 2% of the senate votes.

So Wyoming gets the big 3X boost in the electoral college, but an 11X boost in the senate. Indiana is equal in voting power in the house, electoral college. Texas gets a little ding in the electoral college but a huge ding in the Senate.
 

Bob Sugar

Active Member
Yeah that's a good point. That does decrease the power of the big states slightly, although not nearly as much as the Senate. That is where the small states get a huge boost in power. 81% of the electoral college power is based on population so it track population pretty well. Wyoming has .17% of the population, .23% of the house votes, .56% of the electoral votes and 2% of the Senate votes. Nevada has .92% of the population, .92% of the house votes, 1.1% of the electoral college votes and 2% of the Senate votes. Indiana has 2.02% of the population, 2.07% of the house votes, 2.04% of the electoral college votes and 2% of the Senate votes. Texas has 8.68% of the population, 8.7% of house votes (after it gains 2), 7.4% of the electoral college votes and 2% of the senate votes.

So Wyoming gets the big 3X boost in the electoral college, but an 11X boost in the senate. Indiana is equal in voting power in the house, electoral college. Texas gets a little ding in the electoral college but a huge ding in the Senate.
It's almost like it was designed that way... Otherwise, we'd just need the house.
 

Frog-in-law1995

Active Member
But in terms of the electoral college the voting power of each state is pretty close to what it gets in the house. The boost is largest for the really small states with one representative but still not close to the boost in voting power they get in the senate.
Because it’s exactly equal to the voting power they have in Congress, as designed. Why compare it to either chamber?
 
Because it’s exactly equal to the voting power they have in Congress, as designed. Why compare it to either chamber?
I guess I'm trying to make the point that the electoral college really doesn't really give much of a small state or flyover state boost. The vote distribution is more proportional and akin to that of the house. The benefit is definitely greatest for the 3 electoral vote states, like Wyoming. But once you even get to 5 electoral vote states the increase is nominal. And on the flip side Texas and Cali really aren't dinged that much by the electoral college like they are in the Senate- only a 15-25% decrease in votes for the biggest states. In the senate those states get decreased by several 100%.
 

LVH

Active Member
Theory out there is that the FBI Gestapo was seeking Spygate/FISA abuse documents that had been declassified by Radcliffe

 

AroundWorldFrog

Full Member
The biggest insult here is that someone would make, sell or actually eat vegan ice cream.

 
Here’s the other pew polling of the day:



Pretty dramatic increases across the board since 2016.
 

HFrog1999

Member
Here’s the other pew polling of the day:



Pretty dramatic increases across the board since 2016.

I can’t speak for Democrat voters

But I wouldn’t hate Democrats as much if they weren’t trying to make my life as absolutely miserable as possible every time they get elected with, high taxes, onerous regulations, mandates, shutdowns, inflation, crime etc etc
 
I can’t speak for Democrat voters

But I wouldn’t hate Democrats as much if they weren’t trying to make my life as absolutely miserable as possible every time they get elected with, high taxes, onerous regulations, mandates, shutdowns, inflation, crime etc etc
Yeah the hate/ distrust is pretty bad right now. Obviously been that way for a while but I am pretty surprised by the big increases since 2016. I think it is sad, really. And it’s not just happening in the US, either.
 

Eight

Member
I guess I'm trying to make the point that the electoral college really doesn't really give much of a small state or flyover state boost. The vote distribution is more proportional and akin to that of the house. The benefit is definitely greatest for the 3 electoral vote states, like Wyoming. But once you even get to 5 electoral vote states the increase is nominal. And on the flip side Texas and Cali really aren't dinged that much by the electoral college like they are in the Senate- only a 15-25% decrease in votes for the biggest states. In the senate those states get decreased by several 100%.

sorry sink, but you made a more convincing case as to why to trust the "experts" on covid
 
Top