53
submitted 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) by Dot@feddit.org to c/politics@lemmy.world

Stats screenshot taken at the time of this post.

top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] scarabine@lemmynsfw.com 13 points 4 hours ago

I’m not sure if this is the explanation, but Republicans weren’t discouraged from early voting this year. In prior years, they were, and so there’s been a big boom of Republican votes at the last minute.

According to exit polls, these numbers are return voters, which would suggest there will be no last minute Republican vote surge this year.

Could be copium, obvs, but getting psyched up by early votes has been a real disappointment for me in every election.

[-] Linktank@lemmy.today 60 points 5 hours ago

I'm sick of people in dumbshit states getting to choose who is president. This is an awful system that should be abolished.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 14 points 4 hours ago

Couldn't agree more. The EC is really just a suicide pact for a country that otherwise should be leading us into the future. Instead, we are being held back by people in flyover country with incredibly backwards notions of what the future should look like.

[-] skeezix@lemmy.world 6 points 3 hours ago

We call them cornhole conservatives

[-] pennomi@lemmy.world 52 points 5 hours ago

If we suffer democratically because the average person is stupid, so be it.

If we suffer democratically because the stupidest among us have disproportionately heavy votes, that’s a real problem.

[-] Linktank@lemmy.today 4 points 5 hours ago

States with higher QoL should have heavier weighted votes. Boom tons of problems suddenly getting worked on.

[-] pennomi@lemmy.world 27 points 4 hours ago

One human, one vote. Nothing else is ethical.

[-] felsiq@lemmy.zip 7 points 4 hours ago

I feel like that would become a self fulfilling prophecy very quickly, and result in America constantly punching down on the poorest states (instead of just the poorest people, like they do now)

[-] Linktank@lemmy.today 2 points 4 hours ago

Honestly I'd prefer that at this point. I'd like to be punching Alabama and Florida for failing their own people.

Stupid should be painful.

Why are we okay with this system where we allow the red states to shoot their citizens in the foot constantly and then expect the blue states to keep sending them all kinds of aid?

[-] felsiq@lemmy.zip 2 points 4 hours ago

Let’s say everybody in a state is equally culpable for electing shit leaders for the sake of the hypothetical: this would be fine at first, but what happens if Florida gets their shit together in 30 years and makes a unified push for a good leader and real quality of life improvements for the people? (please suspend your disbelief lmao). All their votes together would mean nothing because of the shit QoL 30 years of republicans would get them, and they’d be powerless to enact any positive change unless the states doing the best under the new system decided to allow it. That’s what I mean by self fulfilling prophecy; poor states can only get poorer and rich ones get richer.

[-] Linktank@lemmy.today 0 points 4 hours ago

I think you're confusing state government with federal government.

The state governments can still enact their own state laws all they want. The high QoL states would still be voting for increased QoL at a federal level. Which would rise the tide even for the dipshits.

[-] felsiq@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 hours ago

I just don’t have any faith in the kind of good state laws could do if the state is already at rock bottom. Seems like it’d require federal intervention (that would be against the interests of all the rich states) imo, tho I can’t pretend to know where Americans like to draw the line for when federal aid is okay lol.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

I doubt that, instead it would be about the reps in those states working to actually lift the lives of their people up, instead of shitting all over them for ridiculous ideological reasons.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world -1 points 4 hours ago

Ooh, what a fantastic idea. I love that.

[-] saltesc@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago

Yeah, but you get to feel like you're a democracy and you're participating at least, right?

[-] timewarp@lemmy.world -4 points 2 hours ago

Apparently not a popular opinion among establishment Democrats like Kamala Harris:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/walz-says-electoral-college-needs-to-go-campaign-says-thats-not-its-position/

[-] nifty@lemmy.world 8 points 4 hours ago

More data here: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-elections/early-vote

I just hope Dem voter turnout stays high till up to and including Election Day

[-] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -2 points 5 hours ago

Associated Press - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Associated Press:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://apnews.com/article/early-vote-records-trump-harris-1c219d0d27d56996388f2e2be5a58fac
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
53 points (90.8% liked)

politics

19087 readers
3663 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS