Clinton versus Trump votes by county

[nolhtairt 0]

This was interesting. Yes we know Clinton won the popular vote by what, 3 million plus? And we also know a majority of those were gained from a narrow swath of large population centers on both coasts.

Now look at this at the county level. The discrepancy is astoundingly in Trump's favor. Trump won 2,626 counties to 487 for Clinton.

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/12/clinton-counties/

Now I know and understand how a lot of people are upset that Trump won, given the way the electoral college works, which has been in use since 1787. Hey, blame the founding fathers if you want to.

Quote

It sought to reconcile differing state and federal interests, provide a degree of popular participation in the election, give the less populous states some additional leverage in the process by providing “senatorial” electors, preserve the presidency as independent of Congress, and generally insulate the election process from political manipulation.

From this http://www.history.com/topics/electoral-college

Did Russia meddle in the election? Probably. Did it make a difference? I'm going to go with probably not, given the large discrepancy at the county level. Trump simply won the heartland of the United States plus a few key battleground states that were historically Democrat. I believe he had enough electoral votes that he would still have won if Clinton had taken one extra state than she got.

Don't like the electoral college? Then petition to have it scrapped. After all, it's only 11 years younger than the United States of America.

[kallend 1,623]

I don't recall the expression:

"Government of the people by the counties for the counties" anywhere in the USA's archived documents.

Nor the expression:

"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all counties are created equal".

Finally, the purpose of the EC is described quite clearly in Federalist #68 written by James Madison, and it is NOT to give sparsely populated regions a greater weight in choosing the president.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[nolhtairt 0]

kallend

I don't recall the expression:

"Government of the people by the counties for the counties" anywhere in the USA's archived documents.

Nor the expression:

"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all counties are created equal".

Finally, the purpose of the EC is described quite clearly in Federalist #68 written by James Madison, and it is NOT to give sparsely populated regions a greater weight in choosing the president.

I included the quote in my post and cited my source. Stop twisting them around.

No wonder the liberals are so butthurt this time.

[BIGUN 1,053]

Quote

Federalist #68 written by James Madison

Written by Publius (Hamilton, Madison & Jay). Many think it was consistent with Hamilton's writings and as such have named him author.

"Sparsely populated regions" have a lesser weight in choosing the President.

Quote

...that the people of each State shall choose a number of persons as electors, equal to the number of senators and representatives of such State in the national government, who shall assemble within the State, and vote for some fit person as President. Their votes, thus given, are to be transmitted to the seat of the national government, and the person who may happen to have a majority of the whole number of votes will be the President. But as a majority of the votes might not always happen to centre in one man, and as it might be unsafe to permit less than a majority to be conclusive, it is provided that, in such a contingency, the House of Representatives shall select out of the candidates who shall have the five highest number of votes, the man who in their opinion may be best qualified for the office.


SOURCE: https://www.congress.gov/resources/display/content/The+Federalist+Papers#TheFederalistPapers-68

You may find this interesting. Here's what the US electoral map looks like adjusted for population

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[jakee 1,255]

nolhtairt

Now look at this at the county level.

Why?

Quote

The discrepancy is astoundingly in Trump's favor. Trump won 2,626 counties to 487 for Clinton.

Who gives a shit?

County lines are completely arbitrary, and population differs wildly. The least populated US county has 82 people living in it, the most populated has ten million. You obviously think that the people living in smaller counties are more important than the people living in bigger ones, but by how much? How many 82 person counties does it take to outweigh one 10,000,000 person county?

Further, the 'won x number of counties/states' argument never considers the margin of victory in each state. Any majority no matter how tiny, according to that argument, turns that state into a monolithic block of red or blue when in reality it is anything but.

So question number two: Assuming 10 equally sized counties, does red victory by 10 votes in 9 of them outweigh blue victory by 200 votes in the 10th? The 'won x counties' argument considers it to be one blue county trumping 9 red counties. Reality has 9 counties split almost straight down the middle and one county with a clear majority. So again, what is more important - the counties or the people in them?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[kallend 1,623]

nolhtairt

***
I don't recall the expression:

"Government of the people by the counties for the counties" anywhere in the USA's archived documents.

Nor the expression:

"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all counties are created equal".

Finally, the purpose of the EC is described quite clearly in Federalist #68 written by James Madison, and it is NOT to give sparsely populated regions a greater weight in choosing the president.

I included the quote in my post and cited my source. Stop twisting them around.

No wonder the liberals are so butthurt this time.

Still no rationale as to why we should care one whit for the county vote except with respect to county government.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DJL 232]

Quote

County lines are completely arbitrary, and population differs wildly. The least populated US county has 82 people living in it, the most populated has ten million. You obviously think that the people living in smaller counties are more important than the people living in bigger ones, but by how much? How many 82 person counties does it take to outweigh one 10,000,000 person county?

I agree with the point of it because we do have account for everyone's interest. Using NAFTA as an example, the votes of those farmers in the sparse areas of Mexico didn't stand up to the population of Mexico city who stood to profit by increased manufacturing and the result was that Mexican agriculture was decimated by cheap US corn.

Also, just because more people agree on something that doesn't make it good for the country but that can go any direction if you're talking about weighting. The only reason I mention that is because we're not a pure democracy and elected officials need to do better at prioritizing the interests of the country instead of pandering to the mob.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[rushmc 18]

nolhtairt

No wonder the liberals are so butthurt this time.

You got that right!!!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

kallend

Finally, the purpose of the EC is described quite clearly in Federalist #68 written by James Madison, and it is NOT to give sparsely populated regions a greater weight in choosing the president.

Which one?

http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/madison.htm

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

I agree with the point of it because we do have account for everyone's interest. Using NAFTA as an example, the votes of those farmers in the sparse areas of Mexico didn't stand up to the population of Mexico city who stood to profit by increased manufacturing and the result was that Mexican agriculture was decimated by cheap US corn.

But this isn't a referendum, it's an election.

Quote

Also, just because more people agree on something that doesn't make it good for the country

Sure, but that's not the point of democracy.

Quote

The only reason I mention that is because we're not a pure democracy and elected officials need to do better at prioritizing the interests of the country instead of pandering to the mob.

Weighting the votes of certain people in certain areas of the country just means that a different mob is being pandered to. That the mob is smaller doesn't make it better.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[kallend 1,623]

rushmc

***


Finally, the purpose of the EC is described quite clearly in Federalist #68 written by James Madison, and it is NOT to give sparsely populated regions a greater weight in choosing the president.

Which one?

http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/madison.htm

Publius.

In no way affects the contents. The purpose is very clearly defined, and it's not to benefit rural areas. It's to guard against populists. The exact kind of reality TV star that's just been chosen. The EC failed miserably to do its job.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rehmwa 2]

It's the United States of America in name and concept...

Not the United Counties of America

so this thread starter succeeds in missing the point of both arguments:

1 - the whole point of the Electoral College and how the states were to be treated by design of the founders
2 - the whole point that popular vote advocates want to move further towards individualism as a natural evolution from states to persons

so while today's discussion is the balance between 1 vs 2, this thread goes off on a tangent of epic mootness - this is just random rationalization of the Trump result instead of a good discussion of government philosophy. I'll just bundle the 'hey look at the counties' crowd in with the people that go back and forth between 1 and 2 depending on the outcome they are outraged/excited about.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[piisfish 135]

Whatever the breakdown. Trump has been elected. Half the population is happy, the other half is not. As usual.

Now you guys have a president for the next 4 years. What are You going to do to help the country getting better till next election?

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[kallend 1,623]

piisfish

Whatever the breakdown. Trump has been elected. Half the population is happy, the other half is not. As usual.

Now you guys have a president for the next 4 years. What are You going to do to help the country getting better till next election?

I'm going to skydive and scuba dive more.

Oh, and pay my taxes.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[airdvr 197]

It's not even half the population. There are roughly 319 million people in the US.

Clinton got 65,844,954 votes 20% of the population
Trump got 62,979,879 votes 20% of the population

I don't trust either 20% to make that decision.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[brenthutch 383]

As long as liberals/progressives sequester themselves in urban and coastal enclaves they will never be able to achieve any reforms to our electoral process. Yes counties don't have a vote, but states do. You can wax philosophical all day long about how unfair it is but that will change nothing.

[jakee 1,255]

brenthutch

As long as liberals/progressives sequester themselves in urban and coastal enclaves they will never be able to achieve any reforms to our electoral process. Yes counties don't have a vote, but states do. You can wax philosophical all day long about how unfair it is but it will change nothing.

See this right here? Perfect example of the delusion I was talking about earlier that a state which has gone red is a monolithic block of red, and vice versa. There are plenty of conservatives in the cities and plenty of liberals in the heartlands.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[brenthutch 383]

jakee

***As long as liberals/progressives sequester themselves in urban and coastal enclaves they will never be able to achieve any reforms to our electoral process. Yes counties don't have a vote, but states do. You can wax philosophical all day long about how unfair it is but it will change nothing.

See this right here? Perfect example of the delusion I was talking about earlier that a state which has gone red is a monolithic block of red, and vice versa. There are plenty of conservatives in the cities and plenty of liberals in the heartlands.

Yes you are correct, just not enough to make a difference. Who is delusional now?

[quade 3]

brenthutch

As long as liberals/progressives sequester themselves in urban and coastal enclaves they will never be able to achieve any reforms to our electoral process.

I have a book I would suggest you read. "Guns, Germs, and Steel" by Jared Diamond.

It has a hypothesis about why people live where they do. It also was valuable enough of a hypothesis for the CIA to give him a medal for his work on helping them understand certain things.

Perhaps after reading it you'll understand it's not simply liberals and progressives who live in cities and why.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[airdvr 197]

quade

***As long as liberals/progressives sequester themselves in urban and coastal enclaves they will never be able to achieve any reforms to our electoral process.

I have a book I would suggest you read. "Guns, Germs, and Steel" by Jared Diamond.

It has a hypothesis about why people live where they do. It also was valuable enough of a hypothesis for the CIA to give him a medal for his work on helping them understand certain things.

Perhaps after reading it you'll understand it's not simply liberals and progressives who live in cities and why.

It's almost never that simple however, more democrats than republicans live in the cities. The EC map makes that quite clear.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[brenthutch 383]

The success of West Germany and South Korea, with the corresponding failure of East Germany and North Korea, pretty much blow his thesis out of the water.

[billvon 2,400]

Quote

Clinton got 65,844,954 votes 20.6% of the population
Trump got 62,979,879 votes 19.7% of the population

If you are one of those "factinistas on the nerd patrol."

[billvon 2,400]

Quote

As long as liberals/progressives sequester themselves in urban and coastal enclaves they will never be able to achieve any reforms to our electoral process.

And as long as conservatives/evangelicals continue to cling to their guns and their Bibles in their isolated rural compounds they will never be able to advance the causes of freedom and democracy in the US.

[brenthutch 383]

billvon

Quote

As long as liberals/progressives sequester themselves in urban and coastal enclaves they will never be able to achieve any reforms to our electoral process.

And as long as conservatives/evangelicals continue to cling to their guns and their Bibles in their isolated rural compounds they will never be able to advance the causes of freedom and democracy in the US.

"Don't hate the player, hate the game."
A game that you will most assuredly loose (again) in 2018 with ten Democrat Senators up for reelection in states that Trump won. Say it with me; "filibuster proof majority", "Justice Ted Cruz"... you get the picture.
#WINNING

[Transmitter 0]

brenthutch

The success of West Germany and South Korea, with the corresponding failure of East Germany and North Korea, pretty much blow his thesis out of the water.

Hey stop it right there, don't drag us into your mess. We know that climate change is real, we know the importance of public healthcare, we know that more guns doesn't mean less shootings and we tend to check the things our politicians say for facts before we elect them. So please leave Germany out of it.