It's a map of counties won by each canidate...

[fishmonger]

Bush has won 2.51 million square miles compaired to Kerry's 511k square miles so far.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm

I'd like everyone who'd like to get rid of the electoral college to look at California on this map. The rest of the nation would look like California - where the handful of big cities elect all of the public officials.

[GotNoRice]

Similar picture from the 2000 elections:

http://gotnorice.dynu.com/mandatemap.jpg

But, when I look at California and see all that red, I can't help but think of all the votes that were essentially thrown out when all of the electoral votes went to Kerry.

I like the theory behind the Electoral College, and I certainly think it's a lot better than not having anything at all, but I think state boundaries are somewhat arbitrary for this purpose.

[Stagger]

It might be safe to say (at this point) that America has not identified with Liberalism.

[xwred1]

I like the theory behind the Electoral College, and I certainly think it's a lot better than not having anything at all

Why are presidents so special that we count citizen's votes towards them, but don't REALLY count those votes? Electoral College doesn't get used on anyone else does it?

[DeadLamb]

Originally posted by xwred1
but don't REALLY count those votes?

as it's been said over and over and over.... it shows a voter block with in a given area.. other wise you could have a pres run on the idea of everyone with in 250miles of a coast will pay no tax and everyone in the middle will make up the dif.. or 200% tax on farmers with land..

Then have it pass.. Electoral College takes into account every state's issues and gives them a say.. We don't need it for other offices like governor, senate, house of representatives etc being in those case that district or area is so small the needs of the voters with in that state or district are all that mater..

The media just spins it like state A is a given and state B is the "key battle ground state".. Nothing stopped bush from going out to California and hitting us, for the errr 55 right I think electoral votes we have. He could have said "F*** you!!" to a bunch of other states and just pounded the issues here, but effort wise it was less to hit those state and battle there..

More so being he had nothing to pitch at california.. We are not backwards ass to the point that you can bash on gays and "moral" issues and we over look everything else. Again, most of you (I think)here voted on fiscal issues or feeling on the war effort..

Many in the mid-west just went with "Bush will make sure my daughter will not catch the queer sickness!!"

http://www.fusionlangaming.net/1104/jesusland.jpg

IMO fishmonger was 100% right in why Kerry lost.. they ran a shitty, tooo far left person.. He looked grumpy, old and pissed and was just way too far left.

[GotNoRice]

Because the population of the United States of America is diverse, and it is important to have representation of people from all across the country and not just those who live In dense population areas. Like for example: Why would people in big cities care about farmers? What if a candidate came along, and said that he would lower taxes on people in cities over 100,000 people while adding extra property tax on people who have more than X amount of land? The fact of the matter is that people are selfish, and if all it takes is the support of the large cities to elect a president, then big cities are going to be the only thing the president cares about, and the only thing that is represented in the executive branch of government. But as I said before, I don’t think state boundaries are the most appropriate way to segment electoral blocks.
But all in all, the Electoral College doesn’t not change a whole lot. The results of the popular vote and the Electoral College almost never differ, and it took a virtual tie in 2000 to actually have the Electoral College end up making the difference.

[Chronoglass]

see but all of this would only work once

sure a president could say they'll drop taxes for city dwellers.. but then the budget is fucked moreso.. oh, make that up from farmers with land.. then the price of... uhm everything, goes all to shit, especially for people who have to have it trucked to them.. oh, cities, woot

the only people that might have a year or so of hard times are the ones that run products that have set prices.. like milk, but then again, they just throw a little cash out and get the price of that raised (since they can show expense) and we spiral to our doom

could a person get elected on a platform of here you go, you're a mass of people, candy for you!

yeah.. roughly once a generation I bet

[DeadLamb]

Originally posted by Chronoglass
see but all of this would only work once

no it would work almost every time.. being the examples thrown out are the far end of issues, that is not what would really happen..

it would just be a swap to a focus, away from the over all issues that effect people, to just ones that effect people in citys vs outside areas.. Stuff like cheaper gas for the coast area by way of a "transport tax", so just a little cheaper.. Water rights, etc etc..

There is a map of this election that shows area by population rather than land.. On that map you can see that it was not this huge red land slide that the over all state by state map shows.. It's a lot closer and it really shows that the coast areas, those few areas have soooooooooo many people they were almost able to over come all the people in the middle..

[xwred1]

Because the population of the United States of America is diverse, and it is important to have representation of people from all across the country and not just those who live In dense population areas.

Wouldn't this be an argument against the EC?

Rather than all 33 million californians counting for a single set of ideas (Kerry's), you would have a more granular representation of what the people wanted.


it is important to have representation of people from all across the country and not just those who live In dense population areas.

I don't understand how the EC fixes this. The entire state still only counts for one thing, the number of EC votes a state gets is based on population (so CA smashes Rhode Island), and it still doesn't discourage e.g. Bush from just working the population centers in whatever battleground state is being contested.

[xwred1]

it would just be a swap to a focus, away from the over all issues that effect people, to just ones that effect people in citys vs outside areas..

This is what democracy is all about. You don't try to be fair, you just care for your constituents and people voting you in or out of office is supposed to make sure that the "right" person gets into office... right being whoever the majority chooses.

Really, Democracy wasn't designed to try and afford special cares to niche groups. It was designed to be an automatic mechanism for evolving the will of the majority. If you want to be playing a deliberate balancing act to care for people with no voting power, you're going to need to dump democracy and go for some sort of command system that involves more planning.

[DeadLamb]

Originally posted by xwred1
Democracy wasn't designed to try and afford special cares to niche groups.

here just read the link and soak it all in.. it covers the two main reasons for the EC

http://www.thisnation.com/question/051.html

again, yeah it's "America" but it is also really 50 states all playing nice with each other.. The EC says smaller states SHOULD have a say as to who they want as president. If you just went pop vote they would never have any say, ever.. They just don't have enough people..

Nothing stops California from being the end all be all of swing states.. All whoop ass, 55 EC votes, crushing about 14+ other states combined total number of EC votes.... :) They just don't come out here and even try.. It's not "niche groups" who make everyone duck the big gun 55 EC state.. ya just can't win out here as easy as you can other places..

you can't show up out here and dog and pony show your way to votes as you can in middle of no where USA.. So they don't even try, that is NOT the fault of the EC system..

The only reason you see people all freaked out right now over the outcome of the last election is the exit polls that show "moral values" being the main issue for too many. As in they over looked every thing else, the war, the econ etc etc etc.. Vote for bush for the reasons I think many of you did: because you think he did a good job, war was ok to start, ya think he can lead an econ turn around fine, no one would get that worked up about it really.

errrrrrrrrrrrrr but vote for him being ya over looked that other stuff for "moral issues" scares people being those sort of people really like to tell others what they should or should not do in ones own personal life.

[xwred1]

The first two reasons they list in the last paragraph of that page seem pretty weak to me... this one is the only one that I think has any legitamacy:

Imagine that presidential elections were not decided state-by-state, but rather by a nationwide popular vote. The significance of states and the candidates' competition for support in key, "swing" states would disappear. Candidates would be inclined to simply run nationwide ad campaigns and visit large population centers.

Even now we still see this effect... with things being the high population coasts being just barely overwhelmed by the sparsely populated central land... it would just be broken up more finely with no EC.

[BreadMan]

Hey everybody, check this out:

http://www.edgetech-us.com/images/Map/Gallery/INS/edu12.gif

Its a map of High School dropouts across the US by county. Some startling revelations can be discovered by comparing it to the above.

Edit: Just wanted to clarify, the big white areas around nebraska have such a low percentage because those are the ones that don't make it as far as high school, as shown here:

http://www.edgetech-us.com/images/Map/Gallery/INS/edu9.gif

[GotNoRice]

Originally posted by BreadMan
Hey everybody, check this out:

http://www.edgetech-us.com/images/Map/Gallery/INS/edu12.gif

Its a map of High School dropouts across the US by county. Some startling revelations can be discovered by comparing it to the above.

Edit: Just wanted to clarify, the big white areas around nebraska have such a low percentage because those are the ones that don't make it as far as high school, as shown here:

http://www.edgetech-us.com/images/Map/Gallery/INS/edu9.gif

Can’t win the election, so just fall back on “its cuz ther dumb”. Ok.

Also, doesn’t “Percentage of Population with 9 to 12 Years of Education Without High School Degree” include just about every single kid who is currently in Highschool? So what exactly is that statistic measuring?

[Bunnyslayer]

They had a good map on CNN last night that didn't just go for the traditional red/blue but mixed it into shades of purple representing how one way or another a state voted and it was actually a pretty even color of purple (except in Texas, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Idaho). Strange that the votes were so evenly disperesed really, took me by surprise.

[DeadLamb]

Originally posted by GotNoRice
Can’t win the election, so just fall back on “its cuz ther dumb”. Ok.

again, for the reason's some voted for bush, no.. for the reason's a whole lot of people did, yes.. dumb

did ya see the exit polls? I would feel better if the main reason a person voted for bush was that they felt he was a good leader on home and world issues.. While I might not agree, there is at least a debate..

if it's just "moral values" then we can't have a debate being they will always feel this or that is wrong, even when it has nothing do with them "just because it is wrong".. That is a form of dumb.. In light of the war and the econ down turn THAT really, really makes it dumb..

IMO 20% of bush voters were fine.. Those 20% that did not put "moral values" as the top of the list, while troops are fighting an urban war... NOT saying Kerry had the so called BS plan to fix everything, I don't think he did.. It's just that one should sort of THINK about those issue, then if ya liked bush on those issues, great no problem..

This is like the boat is taking in water.. I have a plan to patch this, do that, bail this, then we all go to KFC to eat lunch.. Bunnyslayer has a plan to patch it this other way, bail it this other way and then we all go to Burger King.. Everyone one on the boat goes off to the back to talk it over... then comes back and goes "We really want to eat lunch at KFC!".. WTF?!!?! That's not the issue..

oh and here is your map that shows the range that bunnyslayer mentioned
http://img46.exs.cx/img46/4775/purple_america_2004b.th.gif (http://img46.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img46&image=purple_america_2004b.gif)