Only About 10 States Matter In Electoral Politics.
By Joe Wallace
Winning the presidency is not accomplished by getting the most popular votes. It is won in 50 independent elections for the electors of the states. This is not a new set of rules that was concocted last month to cheat Clinton out of winning. It has been this way since the nation was established.
The first rule of winning any game and this is a game, is to understand the rules and to make choices that result in scoring more points than the opposition. Some states are mismatches and others are tightly contested. CA and NY would go blue if Charles Manson was the Democrat nominee. WY, WV, AL, and a host of other rural states would support Candidate Manson if the Republicans nominated him.
Big wins in these uncontested states are as meaningless as Ohio State running up a 80-0 win over some obscure small college in football. The opposition doesn’t really have a chance and sometimes the scrubs play the whole game to minimize injuries.
Only about 10 states (games) matter in electoral politics. We all know where they are. This year the big games that determined the outcome were FL, NC, OH, PA, MI, and WI and everyone with half a brain knew it. President Obama won them all in 2008 and 5 of them in 2012. So why didn’t Clinton win these states? If Democrat strategists can answer those six questions (or even 4 of them) and correct for their own failures to play the game to win, they will have a battle plan for 2020.
To abolish the electoral college and move to a popular vote will take a constitutional amendment. That will require a 2/3 majority of the states (34) to pass. There is no path to such a victory this year and probably not in the foreseeable future.
Democrats have full control of a whopping 5 state legislatures that would likely vote to eliminate the electoral college. That leaves 29 more votes that would be needed.
We can rage at that reality and assert unfairness in the streets and on Facebook until the stars flame out if we choose, but that will not change the Constitution. A more prudent approach would be to audit the most unlikely defeat in modern politics and form a rational plan to win next time by playing within the rules of the game. This is a fundamental choice that Democrats have to make.
I am an Independent and always have split my vote so please don’t rage at me for a rational analysis of reality. I understand and have felt the thrill of victory and the pain of loss. Picking oneself up and changing after a loss is a valuable and lasting experience. Good luck to both parties at giving us great choices in 2020.
Leave the system as it is… Learn to play the game BETTER ! …Doc
I will agree to that
..and that should start with the Democratic Party eliminating the Super Delegate rule ..
This map says all that needs to be said about this last election. It also makes the case why the Electoral College was considered vital by our founders:
http://brilliantmaps.com/2016-county-election-map/
In 1787, there were 55 representatives are the Constitutional Convention of which only 39 voted for the Constitution. According to historical accounts, if the electoral college was omitted, we would not have the Constitution. NH, R.I., DE, MA, N.C., SC, GA were definitely out. Of course, if the upper chamber of Congress was not implemented, the Constitution was not to be ratified as well. Apparently, according to the election map, if the popular vote ruled, this country would be nothing more then a nation of City states and that my friend is why we have the Constitution as written like it or not ..
Comments are closed.