Now, look at this:
This is a map of the counties in the US and how their votes went.
Notice how few Blue spots there are?
Those Blue spot represent highly populous areas that voted Democrat.
In this country we have a mostly "winner take all" approach to the appointment of Electoral College votes.
A few states have gone "proportional". That means that the Electoral College votes they provide are based on the proportion of votes the parties won in that state's election.
I have long been suspicious of that idea.
I'm beginning to like it, but I wonder if there's something better .
I live in Michigan. This is the first year we have given our votes to the Republican Party since 1988.
Remember Florida in 2000 with the "hanging chads"?
That election was turned on the results of a few votes.
What if every congressional district supplied it's Electoral College votes independently? Then the majority vote of the state supplied the other two?
There would have been no question as to who won the election.
On my post yesterday, Kid commented "If reps had to vote the way their district voted, we'd never have another democrat president again."
This election, we (conservatives) won even more state legislatures and governorships.
We need to take advantage of this, and like congressional redistricting, done at the state level also, make sure our voices are heard.
I still live in an area that votes Dem. My vote would be lost in a sea of Dem votes, but my friends in Kalamazoo would have votes that count.
Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, Michigan would just be other states in a Federal Election and not the "battleground".
Does it make more sense to base the distribution on dostricts or state voter percentage?
Intuitively, I suspect district, even though districts are allocated to population .
This is the second iteration of this post since I inadvertently erased it trying to insert that Prager University video.
I've rushed to rebuild it from memory in order to get to church on time.
I may come back and tweek it later.