User Tag List

View Poll Results: How will the popular vote and electoral college be split?

Voters
31. You may not vote on this poll
  • Obama wins both.

    17 54.84%
  • Romney wins both.

    2 6.45%
  • Obama wins the electoral college and Romney wins the popular vote.

    11 35.48%
  • Romney wins the electoral college and Obama wins the popular vote.

    1 3.23%
First 293738394041 Last

Results 381 to 390 of 424

  1. #381
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JivinJeffJones View Post
    They must've done a damn good job.
    They did, but not as good as you might think; the Democratic vote does tend to congregate into densely populated and highly concentrated pockets, which gives Republicans an inherent advantage with the House vote. Furthermore, there are areas where the people tend to favor Democrats in Presidential races and Republicans in House races, such as in Michigan and Pennsylvania (though the Republicans of the latter state also did an exceptionally effective job of gerrymandering-most constituents in those districts did not seem to mind, though the white Democrats were pissed). Finally, legally binding interpretations of the Voting Rights Act, combined with coinciding interests of minority Democrats and white Republicans, leads to the creation of 'majority-minority' districts (with Democratic support ranging from 60% to as high as around 95%, usually around 70-80% ) wherever possible.

    The forum at the following site is a good place to go to for a quick and dirty education on the finer details of the American electoral system, including redistricting: http://uselectionatlas.org/

    They even have links to free apps that allow you to create your own districts, if you're curious about how much better the Democrats could have done under different redistricting scenarios (though it'll probably be awhile before its updated to include 2012 info.

  2. #382
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Without watching, here's my take on Nate Silver; he was right (and more importantly, so were folks at PPP and Marist). This indicates that polling (and exit polling) have vastly improved since 2004, and the traditional Democratic/Republican turn-out gap no longer exists (we'll need to wait until 2016 to determine whether that's structural or linked closely to Obama's appeal-I've recently heard that Obama's own campaign team thinks its the latter, but I have not yet investigated what they, rather than the headlines, said).
    Here's the article: http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/...016-aide-says/

  3. #383
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    They did, but not as good as you might think; the Democratic vote does tend to congregate into densely populated and highly concentrated pockets, which gives Republicans an inherent advantage with the House vote. Furthermore, there are areas where the people tend to favor Democrats in Presidential races and Republicans in House races, such as in Michigan and Pennsylvania (though the Republicans of the latter state also did an exceptionally effective job of gerrymandering-most constituents in those districts did not seem to mind, though the white Democrats were pissed).
    As a side note, sometimes the gerry-mandering doesn't work. I just brought this up because it was amusing when it happened, I recall it vividly since it was my home county at the time:

    ...After the 1980 census, Pennsylvania lost two congressional districts due to very slow population growth. The Republican-controlled legislature drew a new, heavily Republican Harrisburg-based district designed for Gekas. He easily won the seat in 1982 and was reelected nine more times.

    Gekas was one of the House's most conservative members, much to the liking of a district where Republicans dominated at every level of government. However, he alienated many Democrats and moderate Republicans in the Harrisburg area with his voting record, lack of zeal in bringing federal funds back home, and his leadership in seeking to make individual bankruptcy status more difficult and less useful to obtain. However, the district was drawn in such a way that Gekas never faced any serious opposition during his first 10 campaigns, and he even ran unopposed in 1994. He was one of the House managers in the impeachment trials of Alcee Hastings and President Bill Clinton.

    ...Pennsylvania lost two districts after the 2000 census. One of the districts that was eliminated was the Reading-based 6th District, represented by five-term moderate-to-conservative Democrat Tim Holden. The legislature split the 6th among three other districts, placing Holden's home in Gekas' 17th District. On paper, the new 17th so heavily favored Gekas that it appeared to be unwinnable for a Democrat, even a conservative Democrat like Holden. Indeed, George W. Bush had won the district with 57 percent of the vote in 2000, and 60 percent of the district came from Gekas' old territory. Some thought the district had been blatantly gerrymandered to force Holden out of office.

    However, Holden surprised everyone by running in the 17th, even though it was 65% new to him (a small portion of the even more Republican 9th District had been shifted to the 17th). Gekas received another rude surprise as the campaign wore on, as much of his old base endorsed Holden. Even his hometown paper, The Patriot-News, endorsed Holden, saying that the 17th was not the same district that originally sent Gekas to Congress. Further, Holden made much of the fact that Gekas had never set foot in two predominantly African-American neighborhoods in Harrisburg, Uptown and Allison Hill, since first going to Congress. Holden visited these neighborhoods and asked residents not to vote for a congressman who could not trouble himself to visit them. On election night, Holden defeated Gekas by almost 6,000 votes. Gekas was the only Republican incumbent placed in a district with a Democratic incumbent to be defeated for re-election in 2002.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  4. #384
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Interesting map. I think it's imporant to see that many states are actually very blended.

    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  5. #385
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JivinJeffJones View Post
    They must've done a damn good job. I guess there's no way around it, but it really seems intentionally undemocratic (small d). Maybe ban polling 3 months prior to a rezoning, and ban rezoning for 3 months after an election. Ha.
    Just about the only way you'd get rid of gerrymandering is to have a system with no politicians tied to territories at all, like a congress based strictly on a proportional national vote or something.

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    They did, but not as good as you might think; the Democratic vote does tend to congregate into densely populated and highly concentrated pockets, which gives Republicans an inherent advantage with the House vote.
    Basically, if it weren't capped at 435, this wouldn't be the case, because New York City and Los Angeles, along with all the others, would be made of many more districts, while Wyoming might even still be just one district.

    But if you look at what we'd have without the cap, I recall it being something crazy. Over 1000 representatives, at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Interesting map. I think it's imporant to see that many states are actually very blended.

    Vermont is the bluest and Utah is the reddest. That sounds perfectly right.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  6. #386
    respect the brick C.J.Woolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    424

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    But if you look at what we'd have without the cap, I recall it being something crazy. Over 1000 representatives, at least.
    For what it's worth, the US House of Representatives has fewer seats than the British House of Commons. A US Representative represents about 750,000 people, over 10 times as many as does a British MP.

  7. #387
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C.J.Woolf View Post
    For what it's worth, the US House of Representatives has fewer seats than the British House of Commons. A US Representative represents about 750,000 people, over 10 times as many as does a British MP.
    The UK is also a Parliamentary system with high party discipline.....with such control by the national leadership, MPs are really more like representatives for their national parties than they are for local constituents, so their number is kind of superfluous.

  8. #388
    Senior Member JivinJeffJones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    3,698

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Just about the only way you'd get rid of gerrymandering is to have a system with no politicians tied to territories at all, like a congress based strictly on a proportional national vote or something.
    In this day and age surely it wouldn't be too difficult to come up with some non-partisan computer algorithm to divide up districts based on population? It could produce eg 7 possible models and both parties get to strike out 3 options each that they don't like, with the last option standing being the new district divisions. Or 9 models, or 13, or whatever. Pipe dreams I know, but at least it stops the practice of putting people into new districts specifically to suppress their vote.

    This is why I generally avoid politics threads.

  9. #389
    Senior Member ZPowers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    1,492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Interesting map. I think it's imporant to see that many states are actually very blended.

    It's worth noting that this, like an electoral map, looks more red than it really is simply because larger but less populous states are generally more Republican.
    Does he want a pillow for his head?

  10. #390
    null Jonny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    FREE
    Posts
    2,486

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LEGERdeMAIN View Post
    It's incredibly naive to say that one's career is one's own and not giving the far-reaching powers of government credit for the difference they make(whether positive or negative). More regulation = higher costs = fewer employees and/or lower wages. It's simple concept, not sure why people don't understand it yet.
    There are always tradeoffs, but there is no reason to think that we can't have regulation and low unemployment. We are recovering from a major financial catastrophe (caused by too few regulations), and it's going to take time for our economy to adjust to the new reality. Before the crisis we had people motivated to spend, invest, and work because of an overinflated amount of capital in the market, and after that sudden and unexpected loss and redistribution of wealth, the economy is out of whack.

    I would also like to point out that the skilled labor force hasn't really been affected, and if you have the talent and drive, you should have no problem finding a job. It's perfectly alright to blame Obama in the meantime, and you can surely use that belief as motivation to vote for a candidate with a different vision next time around, but you would also be well served by utilizing the control you do have to make your situation better.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Similar Threads

  1. United States of America, 2012 Political Positions of Two Major Parties
    By Beargryllz in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-22-2012, 08:16 PM
  2. US Presidential Election statistics
    By Take Five in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-07-2009, 10:59 PM
  3. In honor of today's presidential elections
    By Giggly in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 11-13-2008, 02:47 AM
  4. U.S.E (United states of Europe)
    By Virtual ghost in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 09-27-2008, 01:14 PM
  5. Vote Match quiz (american presidential election)
    By tovlo in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 01-20-2008, 06:44 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO