@HoolaHoopMan said:
@ad1x2 said:
@HoolaHoopMan said:
@horgen said:
How else will we ensure having mostly older white men voting and ruling the country? :P
I say we simply have urban centers break off into city-states. Give them a standard 3 electoral votes as is the rule and then more based on population. See how the GOP would love to see these city-states standing up for their rights!
That may actually help the GOP more than it would hurt it. Out of all of the states with at least one city with a population of a million people or more, Texas (Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio), Arizona (Phoenix), and Pennslyvania (Philadelphia) were the only ones that went to Trump in the 2016 election. In California, while almost 8.8 million voted for Clinton, almost 4.5 million voters voted for Trump, which was only 300,000 less than in Texas and a little over 200,000 less than in Florida. Who knows how many stayed home because they assumed that Clinton was going to win and didn't bother voting (the same can be said about Democrats in Texas).
Houston, Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, and El Paso all went blue in the 2016 election (Counties). You're kidding yourself if you think city centers, by and large, would favor the GOP. I would gather that the same holds for Philly and Phoenix.
Bolded: this holds true for blue or red states, just switch the parties, and I think it's a huge detriment that the EC creates. If anything it's a good argument to make in order to rid ourselves of the EC.
I never said that the big cities would favor the GOP. I was saying that going by the scenario that we broke off the big cities (assuming we are talking about one million+ cities) and gave each of them at least three EC votes a piece (NYC should get the most with their 8 million population), most of the big cities already fell in states that went to Clinton, meaning the remaining GOP voters in those states would keep their votes. For the GOP, it would hurt with Texas since three of the one million+ cities that went blue are in their state, but it would help with California, Illinois, and New York.
But when it comes down to it, trying to get rid of the EC probably isn't going to be what gets Democrats back into the White House anyway. President Obama smashed McCain and Romney during his two elections and got almost 70 million votes his first election. If the DNC came up with a better candidate or NBC didn't sit on the Access Hollywood tape until a month before the election and they released it during the primaries, Trump probably wouldn't be president right now. They need a really good candidate, hoping that hatred is enough to make Trump a one term president may not work the way they think it will.
Democrats don't have control of enough states to amend the constitution to swith to a nationawide popular vote, so talking about it is just a pipe dream for now. Colorado's nine EC votes are unlikely to be the deciding factor unless we have another Bush/Gore situation and if it was I could see the losing candidate trying to challenge it in court assuming that they lost the nationwide popular vote but won the Colorado popular vote. They would probably be better off just doing what Maine and Nebraska does.
Log in to comment