04-04-2019, 02:01 PM
(04-04-2019, 08:24 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I disagree. I've provided quantified evidence to show the arguments of "only a few population centers will be focused on" and "if we abandon the EC, that will cause many states to be ignored" hold no water. I appreciate your opinions, but until you have something to back it up with, I do not see how they can even begin to be considered as legitimate.
I do have something to back it up, a logical argument for the states maintaining supremacy in the election of who leads them. You disagree with this argument, no problem, but I don't think you can logically label my position as illegitimate.
Quote:Only 2 of the 10 smallest states were visited in 2016. New Hampshire is a swing states and got 21 visits. Maine awarded proportionally and got 3 visits... so as it stands, small states are ignored. Using the fact that Maine is actually visited because there's a chance to win PART of the population and votes, logic would suggest that moving towards either 1) a system with proportional allocation of electoral votes or 2) a popular vote would cause more than 2 of the 10 smallest states to get more visits.
Would you consider Wisconsin to be a "small state"? How about Iowa or Nevada?
Quote:Surprising no one, if you look at the next 5 smallest states, only Nebraska (proportional allocation) and New Mexico (potential swing state) had visits...
I suppose we really need to define what we all mean by "small states" to really have this discussion.
