no, its really only to do with the urban vs rural nature of the state. california has like 8 cities of over 400k people.
@onceanlsufan my point has nothing to do with distribution you’re right. What it does address is the point of your initial post about the popular vote. The people who established the electoral college didn’t think about vote distribution. They wanted a way to limit the tyranny of a simple majority. In those days population was determined generally by the physical size of the state. Population density was low so land area was the major determinant of population. Today that’s not accurate as population density can overwhelm space. So states with large cities have high population. By giving two electoral votes to every state, small states can still have influence. As elections in the past have shown the loser of the popular vote can still win. Many see this as a flaw, but I don’t. It provides a balance to mob rule.
Well ... LSUpride, ... I doubt that you have met everyone in the US. I have met several who think it would be perfectly fine for a citizen to own a 50 cal. Machine Gun, or a Minigun, or a Gatlin Gun (of course, cost is an issue). I might have explored a little hyperbole in suggesting a tank, but technically, if you could afford one, it falls under the definition of "own and bare arms", and it' would make an excellent Prom Date Vehicle ... LOL! AND .. I know SEVERAL people who oppose the use of the IUD because they call it an abortion method. Hobby Lobby is one of them!! https://www.theatlantic.com/health/...ential destruction by the IUD is unacceptable. I am anti-abortion for the most part, with exceptions. The IUD is the most effective next to implants and injections. The reason these methods trump the pill and condoms is that they are compliance free. You can't miss an IUD, and the IUD never breaks. They are there, and they are a powerful weapon to fight poverty by preventing teen pregnancy in at risk groups, like the generational welfare queens. They are the number 1 used contraception in the WORLD, ... BUT ... only 8.5% of women in the US use them.
my point about california can be undone by texas that also has a shit load of big urban cities, but i guess they are slowly turning democrat anyways my larger point is that you cant expect everything to occur at a normal distribution.
You are partially right, but the real reason they came up with the EC was that it was the only form selecting the POTUS that preserved the sovereignty of STATES. That was the only way they could convince all the STATES to sign on, as in that day, people were citizens of their STATES, not of any Union And, they distrusted strong Federal Power, because they had just fought a war to get out of that situation. .It was consistent with limiting the Federal Power, as the Federal Power was only intended to oversee the business of the Union, which was delegated and all other matters were reserved to the STATE. The formula based on Senators and Representatives was not based on any nefarious motives. In contrast, including slave lives as 3/5 of a person did. The South was close to 40% slaves, and their populations of white people was considerably less than the citys in the North. Thus, including slaves as 3/5s of a person allowed the Southern States to have more representatives than their white populations would dictate.
