08-18-2016, 12:07 PM
(08-18-2016, 11:56 AM)Benton Wrote: Eh, I don't think that would work for Kentucky. We've got two completely different sides of the state (mostly poor and mostly coal on the east and mostly middle class and river/tourism in the west). You've got some industry in the middle. And through it all, you've got 120 counties, with 4.4 million people. Roughly 25% are in Jefferson and Fayette counties. About 20% of the population lives the in the contiguous counties.
So there's very different needs across the state, and very different economies, but nearly half the people live in a very small area (in respect to the size of the state) of northern Kentucky. It wouldn't be very likely for candidates from the western or eastern ends to stand a realistic chance of getting elected as "hometown" people from the center of the state. Why would someone in central Kentucky (which has higher incomes and less perceived need for the river industry) vote for a guy from western Kentucky running on a platform of expanding the locks to increase the river industry?
I talked to one of our state legislators about a lock problem we've got here (basically, federal funding keeps getting pushed to other Corps projects in larger areas and it's delayed a lock expansion by a decade, costing several million more dollars to complete). The problem, according to him, is you've only got about 6 counties out of 120 and a couple other state senators out of 40 that even know it's an issue. But something like coal gets more of their attention because it effects 13-14 out 40, even though, economically, the river industry in Kentucky isn't that far off from coal.
But the whole point of my plan would be for the minorities to still get a shot at having a representative by not just taking the first place finisher. If all the rural voters selected the same guy then he should finish in the top 6 of the vote and still be elected.
