Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)

32. The Electoral College empowers swing states, not suburban and rural areas

Reply to Goblinmonger (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 22, 2016, 02:04 AM

Dec 2016

As it is, the candidates care a great deal about Philadelphia and Miami. By contrast, they generally ignore New York City and Houston except for fundraising.

They also go outside those big population centers in the swing states, but, again, ignore such suburban and rural areas in the solidly red or blue states.

In a national popular vote, no one would win by campaigning only in "8-10 population centers". Per the 2010 census, the ten most populous Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (which are fairly broad geographically) had a total population of about 81 million, out of a national population of 308.7 million.

ETA: I took the SMSA figures from this Wikipedia article -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_Census#Metropolitan_rankings

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

34 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Trumpscum Won Because An Electoral Vote In Wyoming Is Worth 3 Times As Much As California [View all] TaterBake Dec 2016 OP

Actually, political scientists identified the US as a "civil oligarchy". It's not a democracy. DetlefK Dec 2016 #1

Then let's make it one. lake loon Dec 2016 #4

trump won because not enough people voted for hillary in Wi, Ohio, PA and Michigan beachbum bob Dec 2016 #2

Our system is a FRAUD. lake loon Dec 2016 #3

How much is each vote worth citood Dec 2016 #5

It's based on population SickOfTheOnePct Dec 2016 #8

For the purpose of my exercise, I used voters citood Dec 2016 #10

Re: more accurately SFnomad Dec 2016 #14

Let me re-explain citood Dec 2016 #17

It doesn't matter how many times you "re-explain" it SFnomad Dec 2016 #18

Question citood Dec 2016 #20

I'm not going to play your games ... sorry. SFnomad Dec 2016 #23

Games? citood Dec 2016 #24

Buh-bye n/t SFnomad Dec 2016 #25

That strategy won't get you a good grade in debate class. citood Dec 2016 #26

Yes zipplewrath Dec 2016 #6

Californians are only worth a fraction of someone in Wyoming? That sounds like UNEQUAL Protection KittyWampus Dec 2016 #7

DU would love the EC if the results had been reversed Lurks Often Dec 2016 #9

I'd pretend your allegation valid also if it validated my bias... LanternWaste Dec 2016 #12

Actually, my husband and I were discussing this before the election Bettie Dec 2016 #28

speak for yourself. nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #29

We aren't a democracy. Joe941 Dec 2016 #11

No, you made a common mistake. Kilgore Dec 2016 #27

It Is Ridiculous colsohlibgal Dec 2016 #13

yep. get used to bending over. nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #30

The entire population of Wyoming is only slightly over 500,000 True_Blue Dec 2016 #15

Yeah. Wyoming's the problem. That's the ticket. Goblinmonger Dec 2016 #16

There is a middle ground, which most people are unaware of citood Dec 2016 #19

Population centers HoneyBadger Dec 2016 #22

so what? PEOPLE count, not square miles. I say that as someone who lives in SD. nt TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #31

The Electoral College empowers swing states, not suburban and rural areas Jim Lane Dec 2016 #32

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE WAS A RACIST COMPROMISE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! uponit7771 Dec 2016 #21

AMEN! nt iluvtennis Dec 2016 #33

2 dakotas. make 3 californis, but then there will be 5 texases. pansypoo53219 Dec 2016 #34