You usually see some crap state map painted red or blue, but look where the votes come from overwhelmingly and it's not tough to see why rubes get their asses kicked in general elections for the most part.
//http://m.fastcodesign.com/1671294/infographic-a-3-d-map-of-where-votes-were-cast-most
New York, LA, Chicago, DC, Detroit, and that's about it, huh.
Of all the cities in this country, Detroit is the one that I least want to vote in any election. It's like aliens picked the most crime-ridden cities to have the most influence on federal elections.
APA, you just have to start trouble don't you? :lol: Solitary
Quote from: "zarus tathra"New York, LA, Chicago, DC, Detroit, and that's about it, huh.
Of all the cities in this country, Detroit is the one that I least want to vote in any election. It's like aliens picked the most crime-ridden cities to have the most influence on federal elections.
Yeah, my ex and her entire family are from Detroit, never been in trouble and I know many good people from Detroit. Yeah, you're right. Disqualify them and give all the votes to fuckhead dynasty assholes because people watch those shitheads on TV. :roll:
And how much does her and her family's votes count against those of everyone else in that city?
She has 7 sisters and 5 brothers and is 62. Do the math. :roll:
That's still nothing.
Ok, people in Detroit actually bother to vote. It has something to do with democracy besides just spouting bullshit out of your ass.
It's not "democracy" if a few large cities have massively disproportionate control of federal elections. Together all those blue spikes might have 15-20 million voters, tops. That's less than 10% of this country's voting age population, but voter turnout makes their influence more like 30-40%.
The same people have the same oportunity to vote for the opposition and people not living there have the opportunity to vote as well. So you're suggesting the people who live outside of the big population centers should have disproportionate representation? They already have it with congress.
I think we need real progressives who can speak the language of middle america to build a campaign.
my guess or at least hope is that even most of the staunch republican voting red staters don't want to drink water laced with cancer causing chemicals, or let billionaires keep trillions in off shore bank accounts while we can't even give our kids a decent education. my guess is most of them would support things like minimum wage laws and creating jobs with infrastructure building. my guess is most of them want affordable healthcare.
the problem is they don't think of those things when thinking of the democrats, nor of the republicans when it comes to opposing those things.
no most of them when they hear "democrat" are thinking of gays marrying, taking god out of school, abortions, or taking their guns away.
and they think republicans will fight that stuff.
On top of that many are hurting economically and don't know who to blame and so are becoming more xenophobic and racist, blaming Mexicans and blacks for "taking over"
in these area's you usually find these shitty "third way" democrats who side against the working class economically. makes it hard to justify voting for them.
like that shithead democrat in Arkansas the other day who came out against a minimum wage increase.
what we need in middle america is a populist movement based on economically progressive ideas, clearly stated.
believe it or not back in the day, there was an active socialist party in Oklahoma and Kansas.
so don't think that economic progressivism can't win in the red states, if we play our cards right.
the question is, will we.
Quote from: "zarus tathra"New York, LA, Chicago, DC, Detroit, and that's about it, huh.
You might want to consider changing your prescription glasses, because there's actually quite a few large blue bars there.
QuoteTogether all those blue spikes might have 15-20 million voters, tops.
Haha. No.
QuoteIt's not "democracy" if a few large cities have massively disproportionate control of federal elections.
But they don't. In fact, the opposite is true, with less populated parts of a state trumping the heavily populated cities *coughcoughTexascough* and less populated states trumping more populated ones in the electoral college.
California has a population of 37,253,956 and 55 electoral votes. (all data from 2010 census and 2012 presidential election (//http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_population))
South Carolina has a population of 4,625,364 and 9 electoral votes.
Alabama has a population of 4,779,736 and 9 electoral votes.
Colorado has a population of 5,029,196 and 9 electoral votes.
Minnesota has a population of 5,303,925 and 10 electoral votes.
Wisconsin has a population of 5,686,986 and 10 electoral votes.
Maryland has a population of 5,773,552 and 10 electoral votes.
4,625,364 + 4,779,736 + 5,029,196 + 5,303,925 + 5,686,986 + 5,773,552 = 31,198,759
9 + 9 + 9 + 10 + 10 + 10 = 57
A grand total of 31,198,759 voters with 57 electoral votes. ~31 million people outvote ~37 million.
Quote from: "hillbillyatheist"my guess or at least hope is that even most of the staunch republican voting red staters don't want to drink water laced with cancer causing chemicals, or let billionaires keep trillions in off shore bank accounts while we can't even give our kids a decent education. my guess is most of them would support things like minimum wage laws and creating jobs with infrastructure building. my guess is most of them want affordable healthcare.
the problem is they don't think of those things when thinking of the democrats, nor of the republicans when it comes to opposing those things.
no most of them when they hear "democrat" are thinking of gays marrying, taking god out of school, abortions, or taking their guns away.
and they think republicans will fight that stuff.
And not just that, but they've somehow convinced themselves to hate even stuff like minimum wage laws and healthcare reform and treat it as apocalyptic if the Dems support it. Sad to say it, but your guess/hope is probably wrong.
QuoteOn top of that many are hurting economically and don't know who to blame and so are becoming more xenophobic and racist, blaming Mexicans and blacks for "taking over"
Or become more fundamentalist and blame the gays and atheists. One hell of a coping mechanism, eh?
Quotewhat we need in middle america is a populist movement based on economically progressive ideas, clearly stated.
Agreed. Unfortunately, the Dems have had a hard time convincingly presenting themselves this way.
There are more Dems in the US than there are Pubes. If everyone voted, liberals would win every election.
But don't you guys see? Republicans are *special* snowflakes and deserve all the underserved breaks! :-$
Quote from: "AllPurposeAtheist"But don't you guys see? Republicans are *special* snowflakes and deserve all the underserved breaks! :-$
It's no wonder that they're the Christian Party nowadays. They operate similarly.
Quote from: "zarus tathra"but voter turnout makes their influence more like 30-40%.
Whose fault is that?