this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
1086 points (98.5% liked)

Microblog Memes

5821 readers
2109 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sour@feddit.org 0 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

TLDR:

Only 2 states to simplify things

Wyoming 3 EV

California 53 EV

56 EV total, 29 EV need to win

Wyoming still has more EV per capita

California wants Candidate B

Wyoming wants Candidate A

Who decides the election? (California)

If what you're saying is that the smaller population with more EV per capita has more pull in an election, then Wyoming would actually have a shot at making Candidate A win by themselves.

California has 53/538 EV.

California controls 10% of the total EVs

Wyoming controls .06%

TLDR again:

As a voter, being able to effect 10% of the total EVs is more powerful than being able to effect .06%.

[–] sour@feddit.org 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

You're missing the point. The viewpoint in the argument is from a single voter. One vote in wyoming weighs more than one vote in California

[–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

One vote in wyoming weighs more than one vote in California

So you're saying that a single voter in Wyoming voting for Candidate A means more than a single voter in California voting for Candidate A?

In order for any of Wyoming votes to even matter, the two candidates would have to be at 268-267 and need Wyoming to be the tie breaker. It would have to come down as a perfect swing state.

California's 53 EV always matters. Harris had to win California to even have a chance at winning.

Neither candidate had to win Wyoming to win

Odds that California comes down to a 20m vs 20m tie or Wyoming coming down to a 250k vs 250k tie are basically the same.

Even if Wyoming was tied like that and 1 voter could make a difference. It would still have to be 268-267 EVs to even matter

[–] sour@feddit.org 1 points 42 minutes ago

It's possible to win the election with 22% of voters. Even if 78% vote against it. There's a great CGP Grey Video on it.

This is not a discussion about how likely it is to happen, but that the electoral college is unbalanced because NOT EVERY VOTE WEIGHS THE SAME.