448
Trump: Civil War didn't need to happen, could have been "negotiated"
(boingboing.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2024
448 points (100.0% liked)
News
23275 readers
3016 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It's all so bad. The House should have thousands of members to give states proportional representation, but instead Alabama votes count for more than California votes. In turn, this makes the electoral* college unbalanced too in the same way. There's a huge bias towards rural voting power.
*damn auto correct 😠
And then people act like "real America" is like a suburb in Ohio or rural parts of Louisiana.
There's ~4 million people in Louisana. There's ~8 million people in New York City alone. Cities are as or more "real" than the other parts.
Yeah they really need to get some more positively charged ions up in that bitch
To be fair, California hasn't built any new housing in 60 years.
California could have 60-70 million people. Instead we are just handing 30 million voters over to Republican states.
That, paradoxically, increases California's proportional voting power. Popular vote doesn't decide elections.
If California had 70million citizens, current district sizes are around 700k. So it would have about 100 districts. It would have about 1/5th of the total electoral college vote.
It's honestly insane that New York and Cali have purposefully handed over political power to republicans since the 60s.
As I understand it, because every state still has to have at least 1 House member (and thus 1 electoral college vote). Without increasing the size of the House then all that can do is reduce the proportional power of each vote within California. The State itself becomes more powerful, sure, but the votes of citizens within California are worth less and less as the population grows. It's a really bad system.
Each district is roughly 700k people. A few districts are bigger, a few are smaller.
California could completely dominate the US House of Representatives and the electoral college.
A state becomes more powerful by having more people.
California has much much more power than Wyoming, even tho each voter in Wyoming might have a tiny bit more power than each voter in Cali.
Yeah, but it's not just Wyoming. It's all the little flyover states all teaming up against big bad California, and using their disproportionate electoral power to do so - it's the reason we've had multiple presidents that lost the electoral college, after all.
Yeah sure they can get 20 extra electoral college votes combined, but California would have 20-30 more itself. California just handed these over to republicans by refusing to build housing for 60 years.
New York has done the same.
We've just handed tons of political power over Republicans, who already have a natural advantage.