Questions about the elections

dimitrispearljamdimitrispearljam Posts: 139,721
edited November 2012 in A Moving Train
2 questions..
1st where i can see the results and the statistics from states etc,link??

2nd..the voting system at the states is a little complicated?..and away different the one we got here..

i see that some states are the key to win,and away more important than others..right?

for exable i had some friends that told me that ill not go to vote cos obama or romnay and their party will win my state so doesnt matter if i vote or not... :?

kinda weird system
"...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    1. basically any news website will have a link to the results by state and various categories (president, house, senator, etc.)

    2. yes ... the electoral system is kinda messed up ... in order to be president - you have to collect 270 electoral college votes ... each state is given x number of electoral college votes to allocate to president that is kinda related to the population ... so, the bigger the population in the state - the more electoral college votes they have to offer ... most states just allocate all of them to whoever wins the state ... so, if 50.1% of people vote in california for obama ... all of there electoral college votes go to obama (55 i think) ... there are like 2 or 3 states that allocate a different way but the vast majority allocate all for one ...

    in many states - historical voting patterns have shown that they generally always vote red or blue ... the ones that don't are called swing states or battleground states ... they are the ones that determine the election ... so, if you lived in a state that traditionally votes one way ... many people feel like they don't need to vote ...
  • JonnyPistachioJonnyPistachio Florida Posts: 10,219
    2 questions..
    1st where i can see the results and the statistics from states etc,link??

    2nd..the voting system at the states is a little complicated?..and away different the one we got here..

    i see that some states are the key to win,and away more important than others..right?

    for exable i had some friends that told me that ill not go to vote cos obama or romnay and their party will win my state so doesnt matter if i vote or not... :?

    kinda weird system

    its a bit confusing Dimitri... sometimes I have to go back and read up to remember how the electoral college works. I could never explain it well.

    But here is an good interactive map of election results: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2012/ma ... sults.html

    and

    the Electoral college: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_ ... ted_States)
    Pick up my debut novel here on amazon: Jonny Bails Floatin (in paperback) (also available on Kindle for $2.99)
  • STAYSEASTAYSEA Posts: 3,814
    Some states have more electoral college votes than others.
    If the electoral college doesn't vote for the majority opinion.
    It's the voters job to not vote for the electoral college.

    just picture a dog that is forever chasing it's own tail. :?
    image
  • polaris_x wrote:
    1. basically any news website will have a link to the results by state and various categories (president, house, senator, etc.)

    2. yes ... the electoral system is kinda messed up ... in order to be president - you have to collect 270 electoral college votes ... each state is given x number of electoral college votes to allocate to president that is kinda related to the population ... so, the bigger the population in the state - the more electoral college votes they have to offer ... most states just allocate all of them to whoever wins the state ... so, if 50.1% of people vote in california for obama ... all of there electoral college votes go to obama (55 i think) ... there are like 2 or 3 states that allocate a different way but the vast majority allocate all for one ...

    in many states - historical voting patterns have shown that they generally always vote red or blue ... the ones that don't are called swing states or battleground states ... they are the ones that determine the election ... so, if you lived in a state that traditionally votes one way ... many people feel like they don't need to vote ...
    thanks alot...that explain all....

    only one more thing..

    so..if lets say there are 100 million people voting in the whole country..

    and one of the 2 running for president get 65 million votes and the other 35 million...

    so..the guy with the 35 million can be the president cos won states that give more electoral votes??

    sorry,but this seems wrong and not democratic....
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • SatansFutonSatansFuton Posts: 5,399
    polaris_x wrote:
    1. basically any news website will have a link to the results by state and various categories (president, house, senator, etc.)

    2. yes ... the electoral system is kinda messed up ... in order to be president - you have to collect 270 electoral college votes ... each state is given x number of electoral college votes to allocate to president that is kinda related to the population ... so, the bigger the population in the state - the more electoral college votes they have to offer ... most states just allocate all of them to whoever wins the state ... so, if 50.1% of people vote in california for obama ... all of there electoral college votes go to obama (55 i think) ... there are like 2 or 3 states that allocate a different way but the vast majority allocate all for one ...

    in many states - historical voting patterns have shown that they generally always vote red or blue ... the ones that don't are called swing states or battleground states ... they are the ones that determine the election ... so, if you lived in a state that traditionally votes one way ... many people feel like they don't need to vote ...
    thanks alot...that explain all....

    only one more thing..

    so..if lets say there are 100 million people voting in the whole country..

    and one of the 2 running for president get 65 million votes and the other 35 million...

    so..the guy with the 35 million can be the president cos won states that give more electoral votes??

    sorry,but this seems wrong and not democratic....

    I don't know if a split that large could actually get the electoral votes or not. But yes, a candidate can win the Presidency and still lose the popular vote. That happened when George W. Bush won his first election, Gore actually had more votes, but you have to carry the right states.

    I think the point of the system is to keep all the people in the most populous states from always electing the president, and actually giving more rural states a more active role in the process. I'm not saying I agree with it, it does seem overly complicated, but people always assure me there's a good reason for it.
    "See a broad to get dat booty yak 'em, leg 'er down, a smack 'em yak 'em!"
  • polaris_x wrote:
    1. basically any news website will have a link to the results by state and various categories (president, house, senator, etc.)

    2. yes ... the electoral system is kinda messed up ... in order to be president - you have to collect 270 electoral college votes ... each state is given x number of electoral college votes to allocate to president that is kinda related to the population ... so, the bigger the population in the state - the more electoral college votes they have to offer ... most states just allocate all of them to whoever wins the state ... so, if 50.1% of people vote in california for obama ... all of there electoral college votes go to obama (55 i think) ... there are like 2 or 3 states that allocate a different way but the vast majority allocate all for one ...

    in many states - historical voting patterns have shown that they generally always vote red or blue ... the ones that don't are called swing states or battleground states ... they are the ones that determine the election ... so, if you lived in a state that traditionally votes one way ... many people feel like they don't need to vote ...
    thanks alot...that explain all....

    only one more thing..

    so..if lets say there are 100 million people voting in the whole country..

    and one of the 2 running for president get 65 million votes and the other 35 million...

    so..the guy with the 35 million can be the president cos won states that give more electoral votes??

    sorry,but this seems wrong and not democratic....

    I don't know if a split that large could actually get the electoral votes or not. But yes, a candidate can win the Presidency and still lose the popular vote. That happened when George W. Bush won his first election, Gore actually had more votes, but you have to carry the right states.

    I think the point of the system is to keep all the people in the most populous states from always electing the president, and actually giving more rural states a more active role in the process. I'm not saying I agree with it, it does seem overly complicated, but people always assure me there's a good reason for it.
    got it..just i think that the one got + 50,01% of the whole country must be the winner and president ..
    cos he will the president of all americans and not of most populous states..his desition affect all american no matter if u live at a small state or a big one...
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • 2 questions..
    1st where i can see the results and the statistics from states etc,link??

    2nd..the voting system at the states is a little complicated?..and away different the one we got here..

    i see that some states are the key to win,and away more important than others..right?

    for exable i had some friends that told me that ill not go to vote cos obama or romnay and their party will win my state so doesnt matter if i vote or not... :?

    kinda weird system

    its a bit confusing Dimitri... sometimes I have to go back and read up to remember how the electoral college works. I could never explain it well.

    But here is an good interactive map of election results: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2012/ma ... sults.html

    and

    the Electoral college: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_ ... ted_States)
    yep..seems complicated..thanks for the links
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • jimed14jimed14 Posts: 9,488
    If states whose electoral votes added up to 270 (the amount of electoral votes needed to win), if they had extremely low turn out and one candidate won each state 50.1% to 49.9%

    Then the other states which added up to 268 electoral votes has extremely high turn out all in favor (say 90% to 10% split) of the 49.9% candidate from above ... the loser in the electoral vote could conceivably win the popular vote by quite a lot.

    The absolute extreme of this, just to prove the point ... take these states ...

    California, Texas, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, Georgia, North Carolina, New Jersey and Michigan ... if I've done the math properly ... they add up to 270 electoral votes.

    Again, for the EXTREME example ... say a candidate won each state, one vote to zero.

    I do believe, that under our current laws, that person would indeed be the president elect with a whopping total of 11 votes ... no matter how many votes came in for the other candidate in the other states. Extreme? absolutely. But it was only to prove the point. It should be noted for the non-Us folks that the political views in these states is vastly different, so, the chance of just concentrating on these states and winning is virtually impossible.


    Then there are the times we've had 3rd party candidates as well ...

    In 1992, Ross Perot ran as a 3rd party candidate and had 19% of the popular vote, but did not win any individual state ... so, he received no electoral votes. Clinton, the winner, only received 43% of the popular vote.

    In 1968 ... the most successful electoral vote total by a 3rd party candidate, George Wallace ... took 46 electoral votes and 14% of the popular vote. (Dude was a racist asshole who believed in segregation, so fuck that guy.)

    If you go to the site 270towin.com ... it will show you historical results with the pull down menu and provide some interesting facts on past elections.
    "You're one of the few Red Sox fans I don't mind." - Newch91

    "I don't believe in damn curses. Wake up the damn Bambino and have me face him. Maybe I'll drill him in the ass." --- Pedro Martinez
  • Yes but remember the electoral college votes get reset every 10 years based on census (the number of votes is based on congressional districts plus 2 senators)... So an extreme number like was suggested is unlikely to happen but still small population states like Wyoming get 3 votes which based on population is significantly larger...
    GoiMTvP.gif
  • Yes but remember the electoral college votes get reset every 10 years based on census (the number of votes is based on congressional districts plus 2 senators)... So an extreme number like was suggested is unlikely to happen but still small population states like Wyoming get 3 votes which based on population is significantly larger...
    yep..i understand how it worls..i saw at the links with results how many people vote...
    there are states with 200.000 votes and states with 10 million..
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    let's just say the electoral college is the least of the problems with voting in the states ... :lol:
  • jimed14 wrote:
    If states whose electoral votes added up to 270 (the amount of electoral votes needed to win), if they had extremely low turn out and one candidate won each state 50.1% to 49.9%

    Then the other states which added up to 268 electoral votes has extremely high turn out all in favor (say 90% to 10% split) of the 49.9% candidate from above ... the loser in the electoral vote could conceivably win the popular vote by quite a lot.

    The absolute extreme of this, just to prove the point ... take these states ...

    California, Texas, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, Georgia, North Carolina, New Jersey and Michigan ... if I've done the math properly ... they add up to 270 electoral votes.

    Again, for the EXTREME example ... say a candidate won each state, one vote to zero.

    I do believe, that under our current laws, that person would indeed be the president elect with a whopping total of 11 votes ... no matter how many votes came in for the other candidate in the other states. Extreme? absolutely. But it was only to prove the point. It should be noted for the non-Us folks that the political views in these states is vastly different, so, the chance of just concentrating on these states and winning is virtually impossible.


    Then there are the times we've had 3rd party candidates as well ...

    In 1992, Ross Perot ran as a 3rd party candidate and had 19% of the popular vote, but did not win any individual state ... so, he received no electoral votes. Clinton, the winner, only received 43% of the popular vote.

    In 1968 ... the most successful electoral vote total by a 3rd party candidate, George Wallace ... took 46 electoral votes and 14% of the popular vote. (Dude was a racist asshole who believed in segregation, so fuck that guy.)

    If you go to the site 270towin.com ... it will show you historical results with the pull down menu and provide some interesting facts on past elections.
    thanksd for the analysis..i just read about historical results..very intresing
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • polaris_x wrote:
    let's just say the electoral college is the least of the problems with voting in the states ... :lol:
    hehe
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • JonnyPistachioJonnyPistachio Florida Posts: 10,219
    polaris_x wrote:
    let's just say the electoral college is the least of the problems with voting in the states ... :lol:
    Maybe Florida should rescind itself as a state. Have we even submitted out voting numbers yet? make room for Puerto Rico hhaa
    Pick up my debut novel here on amazon: Jonny Bails Floatin (in paperback) (also available on Kindle for $2.99)
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    Maybe Florida should rescind itself as a state. Have we even submitted out voting numbers yet? make room for Puerto Rico hhaa

    hey ... you said it not me ... :lol::lol:
  • polaris_x wrote:
    let's just say the electoral college is the least of the problems with voting in the states ... :lol:
    Maybe Florida should rescind itself as a state. Have we even submitted out voting numbers yet? make room for Puerto Rico hhaa
    hehe,,florida in the results is the only state with white color??
    no blue or red??
    its your system there for show that you like everybody(dem-rep) for get more tourist than other states?? :lol:
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • JonnyPistachioJonnyPistachio Florida Posts: 10,219
    polaris_x wrote:
    Maybe Florida should rescind itself as a state. Have we even submitted out voting numbers yet? make room for Puerto Rico hhaa

    hey ... you said it not me ... :lol::lol:

    :mrgreen: This time! I admit when something is completely 100% awry. ;)
    Maybe Florida should rescind itself as a state. Have we even submitted out voting numbers yet? make room for Puerto Rico hhaa
    hehe,,florida in the results is the only state with white color??
    no blue or red??
    its your system there for show that you like everybody(dem-rep) for get more tourist than other states?? :lol:

    :lol: Sounds about right.. FLorida is the voting fiasco state...we need to change our motto.
    But I do believe we ended up blue this time around...surprising a bit. What a weird state. North Florida is a polar opposite from south Florida...it should really be divided, and north florida can join the ranks of Arkansas and Mississippi
    Pick up my debut novel here on amazon: Jonny Bails Floatin (in paperback) (also available on Kindle for $2.99)
Sign In or Register to comment.