General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The electoral college- the greatest vote suppressor ever [View all]mvymvy
(309 posts)With National Popular Vote, every voter would be equal and matter to the candidates. Candidates would reallocate their time, the money they raise, their polling, organizing efforts, and their ad buys to no longer ignore 80% of the states and voters.
Charlie Cook reported in 2004:
Senior Bush campaign strategist Matthew Dowd pointed out yesterday that the Bush campaign hadnt taken a national poll in almost two years; instead, it has been polling [in the then] 18 battleground states. [only 10 in 2012]
Bush White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer acknowledging the reality that [then] more than 2/3rds of Americans were ignored in the 2008 presidential campaign, said in the Washington Post on June 21, 2009:
If people dont like it, they can move from a safe state to a swing state.
Campaigning is more than just "going" places.
Battleground state campaigning is NOT based on density of available votes.
In battleground states, every voter is equal, so a campaign must be run, and IS run everywhere.
Of COURSE candidates will go to rural states for classic photo opps.
The indefensible reality is that more than 99% of campaign attention (ad spending and visits) was showered on voters in just ten states in 2012- and that in today's political climate, the swing states have become increasingly fewer and fixed.
Where you live determines how much, if at all, your vote matters.
None of the 10 most rural states matter now.
With National Popular Vote, where you live will not determine how much, if at all, your vote matters.
16% of the U.S. population lives outside the nation's Metropolitan Statistical Areas. Rural America voted 60% Republican.
The population of the top five cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) is only 6% of the population of the United States and the population of the top 50 cities (going as far down as Arlington, TX) is only 15% of the population of the United States. 16% of the U.S. population lives in the top 100 cities. They voted 63% Democratic in 2004.
Suburbs divide almost exactly equally between Republicans and Democrats.
I have provided actual evidence. Statewide campaigns are not only active in big cities. Candidates try for every vote in the state they can get.
Further evidence of the way a nationwide presidential campaign would be run comes from national advertisers who seek out customers in small, medium, and large towns of every small, medium, and large state. A national advertiser does not write off Indiana or Illinois merely because a competitor makes more sales in those particular states. Moreover, a national advertiser enjoying an edge over its competitors in Indiana or Illinois does not stop trying to make additional sales in those states. National advertisers go after every single possible customer, regardless of where the customer is located.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):