GT: 2018 US Midterm Elections

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Muta

That's because of the gerrymandering going on down there, isn't it?

There's no gerrymandering in the senate as all races are state-wide with no district boundaries. The problem is that small states like Wyoming (pop. 0.6M) have equal senate representation as large states like California (pop. 40M). Small, rural states tend to favour Republican candidates, so they receive disproportionate representation in the senate (and in the Electoral College during presidential elections). A voter in a small state has significantly more power than a voter in a large state. It's anti-democratic and an affront to the notion that all votes should be treated equally.

[calf]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

There's no gerrymandering in the senate as all races are state-wide with no district boundaries. The problem is that small states like Wyoming (pop. 0.6M) have equal senate representation as large states like California (pop. 40M). Small, rural states tend to favour Republican candidates, so they receive disproportionate representation in the senate (and in the Electoral College during presidential elections). A voter in a small state has significantly more power than a voter in a large state. It's anti-democratic and an affront to the notion that all votes should be treated equally.

I'm not too familiar with how everything works, but isn't that balanced out by how representatives are elected in the House? And set up so that the bigger states aren't always bullying the smaller ones?

Or are the sets of responsibilities of the House and Senate too different from each other?

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Muta

That's because of the gerrymandering going on down there, isn't it?

As the article suggests, it's the fact that the seats up for election were heavily Democrat to begin with with the only Republican ones up for grabs primarily being Republican dominated territories. A best likely scenario for the Democrats would have been holding the house as is. You'd have to get into a "blue tsunami" situation for them to have taken the Senate.

The Democrats had 26 seats up for election contrast Republican's 9. With the Republicans having mostly safe bets, it's hard to find spaces where the Democrats could really make headway. Outvoting 44 million to 33 million doesn't help a great deal when you have to win 75% just to break even and you're trying to steal seats in states like Texas.

The surprises in Indiana and Florida seem to be the only things which are tipping the results from the projected results heading into the night (+1 Republican seat gain).

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by calf

I'm not too familiar with how everything works, but isn't that balanced out by how representatives are elected in the House? And set up so that the bigger states aren't always bullying the smaller ones?

Or are the sets of responsibilities of the House and Senate too different from each other?

I think that's a fair statement. Although it worked better when a 60 percent majority was required for most senate votes.

At first glance the EC also seems stacked towards the smaller, rural states, and that makes two levels of government decided disproportionately by rural areas. But really, the EC favors democrats by giving all EC votes from large states like California and New York. Without flipping the rust belt, Trump had no path to 270, and has no path in 2020 if he loses them.

Here's a map that gives some optimism for 2020 based on popular vote for the house yesterday.



Florida probably shouldn't count since they had two statewide races go republican. But even without them, the electoral college map is looking pretty good for 2020, basically if just MI/WI/PA stay blue.

[FLAMESRULE]

Attorney General Jeff Sessions just resigned. LOL. Basically forced out. I can't wait to see the fallout from this.

[vegasbound]

Originally Posted by Thor

HAHA John Tester wins, even with all of Trumps visits, BAM.

Yep. Suck it Trump! I’ve been watching this one just because of how much he hated Tester and how many trips he took to Montana of all places.

[dobbles]

Originally Posted by calf

I'm not too familiar with how everything works, but isn't that balanced out by how representatives are elected in the House? And set up so that the bigger states aren't always bullying the smaller ones?

Or are the sets of responsibilities of the House and Senate too different from each other?

Yes and No. In the lawmaking aspect of duties, the houses are effectively equal, so they would balance each other out. However, the Senate has additional duties in cabinet and judicial confirmations that the House does not have.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by calf

I'm not too familiar with how everything works, but isn't that balanced out by how representatives are elected in the House? And set up so that the bigger states aren't always bullying the smaller ones?

California has 53 House Representatives, or 1 for every ~754k people. Wyoming has 1 House Representative, or 1 for every ~600k people. So even in the House, which is designed to be weighted solely by population, smaller states receive disproportionately more representation (and that's before we even consider the effects of partisan gerrymandering and other voter suppression tactics employed by Republicans to dilute support for their opponents).

In a fair democracy one person = one vote, and all votes should be weighted equally, but the US system doesn't work that way -- not in the House, not in the Senate, and not in the Electoral College.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Would be like awarding every province and territory in Canada a veto vote over parliament. The maritimes could band together and dictate policy for the rest of the country.

I fully support this idea!

[Thor]

Should we close this GT and move back to the other thread, the discussions are split right now.

[Flamenspiel]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

I fully support this idea!

Yes, it all depends on where you stand.

Clearly in Canada Ontario and Quebec have dominated politics for a long time, in many cases detrimental to the other provinces. Conceptually i don't think its such a bad idea to have a senate to balance that out(would have been useful in the TMX debate).

To a certain extent the republicans have "gamed" the system, that does not make it a bad system. There is no magic bullet to remove Trump, he simply has to be voted out.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by Thor

Should we close this GT and move back to the other thread, the discussions are split right now.

Not only that, but you should start a brand new part 3 one.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

Yes, it all depends on where you stand.

Maritime Q~Scout

"Not really hiding where I stand" he posted from Cape Breton Island.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by Thor

Should we close this GT and move back to the other thread, the discussions are split right now.

Yes