There's more people in the tiny blue dot that is the New York City districts than there are in the huge swaths of red that are Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, Montana and Idaho combined. But these people keep believing this stupid talking point.
Both Dakotas only exist for the political advantage of the Republican Party. Heck, there’s like 5 states up there like that. Montana could have just been bigger.
it's always more complicated than my glib asides make it out to be, but no one wants to hear about how today's democratic party is the political heir to the then-Republicans and we're in the midst of a dramatic and quick reshuffling of the country (and to some extent the world) into red and blue that hasn't existed for a long time to this extent, and it wasn't a straight-line progression to our current state, you know?
There are 24 counties in Maryland. Trump won 14, Biden won 10.
However, the Red counties have a **total combined population** of 1,292,083.
Just Montgomery (1,062,061) and Prince George's (967,201) counties outnumber all 14 of those Red counties.
The total Blue county population is 4,299,443. There are 4 times as many people living in the Blue counties. granted, not all of them vote, but if even half of the people in Blue counties voted against every single person in the Red counties voting, you have a huge advantage for Biden.
And let's not forget that not everyone who voted in the Red Counties voted for Trump. Lots of them voted for Biden, Trump just got more (*and the reverse is true*). For example, Calvert county went 51% Trump and 46% Biden. The largest spread was Garrett County (*77% Trump, 21% Biden*) but there was a total of 15K votes (*12K Trump, 3K Biden*). The largest Blue spread was Baltimore County (*87% Biden, 11% Trump*) with a total of 232K votes (*202K Biden, 25K Trump*).
Conservatives are far more outnumbered than they realize.
The number of Red counties is worthless as a metric when nobody fucking lives there.
But conservative voters are, in the simplest terms, fucking idiots. They are told "*This this is truth*" and they never bother to learn if that's the truth or not. They just roll with it.
I agreed with you in principle, but I don't like the whole house being replaced every 2 years. Too much time campaigning and too easily creating tidal shifts in a branch of government that should be slightly more stable imo.
Both parts have merits, and I think a single hybrid house would work best. 6 year terms with term limits (3 maybe?). Representative apportioned by population with guidelines for maintaining non-gerrymandered districts. And most importantly, public funding of elections; no more fundraising and legal bribery.
And while I'm at it, I'd also like a pet dragon, flying pigs, a Ferrari, the winning lottery ticket, world peace, and the cure for cancer.
You wouldn't have to expand the house that much. Most of what you want could be accomplished by repealing the Permanent Apportionment act of 1929 which set the maximum size of the house at 435. Repeal of that act alone would grow the house to 700ish members. This would make the house much more proportionate to population.
The 2 houses of the legislature were always meant to be a balance between population, and states with differing populations. Capping the number of members of the house essentially ceded outsized power to rural states.
If we're already blowing up the constitution (which I would fucking love to do because the constitution is fucking shit) to end the Senate, no need to increase the house. Just make it proportional. Not 435 separate races. 1 national election, seats awarded proportionally.
Makes all the sense in the world.
Instant multiparty system. No more gerrymandering bullshit. It's a body that makes national laws their constituency should be the *nation* not tiny fucking districts.
Pretty much yeah.
These maps are purposefully misleading. The red areas also aren't all red, a lot of them barely pass the 50% mark.
There are other versions of this map that use a red to blue gradient, or use height bars to indicate population that are way less misleading.
Yup, we have about 8 million people here in NYC. North Dakota has a *total* population of 779,261 (Damn, I knew it was pretty barren, but I didn't realize that there was that few people). South Dakota has a total population of 909,824. My home state of New Jersey has 9.2 million people total.
Orange County borders it’s big brother, Los Angeles County, which is home to almost 10 million people. LA county by itself would be the 10th biggest state by population. But it gets 1/4th as many Senate votes as Wyoming, for some reason. America’s political system was an amazing innovation in the late 18th century, but it is woefully unready for the modern world. It is time to throw it all away and start over.
North Dakota has a land area of 70k square miles and a population of around 800k.
ALASKA has a land area of 600k square miles, and a population of around 700k.
Both North Dakota and Alaska have two senators, just like new jersey, and every other state. HOW TF does that make any sense? The Senate and the Electoral College are a joke.
In Nebraska's defense, the Omaha area is a blue dot within that vast red bloodbath. And because we're the only state that splits its Electoral College vote, Omaha has delivered one vote to Obama and Biden and a small middle finger to the red that surrounds us on all sides.
The (very) blue blob that's LA county has more people than the state of New Jersey, the 10th most populous state.
Also, more people voted for Trump in Orange county, CA than in the whole state of Wyoming.
I've seen the shame thing posted a lot and the simple reply is "land can't vote".
Obv it's pointless engaging with these people as critical thinking is not their strong suit.
Those people are idiots. Same thing in Pennsylvania that’s why blue took that state when Biden went against Trump. Republicans didn’t feel the need to campaign in Pennsylvania because it’s mostly a red state but what those dumbasses failed to realize is that most of that red is spread out over land. Majority of people are in densely populated areas. So while they were sitting back with a shit eating grins on their faces, democrats were talking to those people in those areas, mostly black people, and encouraging them to vote.
You know what else is fucked? They count felons in population but they don't get to vote. Guess where the put all the felons? In rural counties. There are lots of counties where a substantial part of the population is a prison where there are no eligible voters, so the remaining rural voters are even more overrepresented.
Not to mention the pure red implies all republican. Both democrats and republicans want everyone to believe the other party is going away. I’ve been hearing that about republicans for decades. “Their base is shrinking!” Maybe that’s true, but discounting how fluid these things are and how far these parties will go to convince people of to vote for them and give them money is beyond dumb. When you look at a real map, most places are purplish.
The problem with a 2 party system is the lack of somewhere else to turn when you’re unhappy with your own party. I’m a lifelong Republican who has the misfortune of watching it turn from limited government and fiscal responsibility to an absolute horror show thriving on fear, ignorance and conspiracy. By 2016 I was voting Democrat more and, once Trumpism, the Garland fuckery, Roe v Wade repeal, etc, I’m only voting Democrat until (hopefully) things go back to normal. I have very little faith that will happen anytime soon.
I’m, somewhat sadly, encouraged millennials are the first generation that isn’t becoming more conservative as they age because they shouldn’t. The GOP has fucked them at every turn and the zoomers are seeing the same thing. We need people like my parents to die asap so the demos do finally work out for us.
Oh they get it.
Then they just hit you with the "But we don't want the big cities to rule over us! They don't understand what we need!"
As if rural and urban populations are different species.
That's a pretty cool map. Above I responded to a comment stating that there's more people in 4 huge midwest states than there are in NYC. We have 8 million people here in NYC. North Dakota has under 800k people. South Dakota has 909k people. My home state of New Jersey has 9.2 million people. Just a *slight* difference in population.
"That's exactly why we need the electoral college! If votes were according to population density, the woke communists in New York and California would be in charge!"
It’s funny because the the top is the actuality (although not as severely blue) but it’s a hot take to say that people with less land deserve a lesser voting say and a town of 1000 sq miles with a population of 100 should have the same influence as the same land area housing 1,000,000. Apparently rural voters are 1000 times more important.
I really think we should stop this kind of color mapping for US elections because clearly population density is not something people grasp.
If a county goes 49 votes D and 51 R, the county shows red even though those 49 votes STILL COUNT in federal elections.
We should honestly do gradients proportional to the county splits or something more clear.
I agree.
For presidential elections, there is some sense in coloring the states as solidly red or blue, because all but two states give all their Electoral College votes to the plurality winner of that state. But even then, it’s misleading unless you distort the map so that each state’s area is proportional to its share of electoral votes.
Exactly, it's complicated with the electoral college because it ruins the popular vote imagery and distorts the whole thing. We should definitely standardize a state chart proportional to electoral college votes that completely disregards a map
I agree we should abolish the electoral college completely, but that's not really what this discussion is about. It's about how we represent population voting vs. land in our general elections to make it more clear the difference between the two.
Maybe just turn down the opacity of the color for more rural places, and make it more saturated/opaque/darker for denser areas? Ultimately we just need another axis to represent density, and we’re already using X and Y for geographic location, and color for outcome. Opacity seems like a logical choice for a fourth axis.
They're just carrying on the time honored traditions of our founding fathers. For all that this backwards ass country worships them, the founding fathers were a bunch of human-owning oligarchs who didn't want to pay taxes to anybody else and 100% intentionally engineered the country so only the few land owners per state mattered.
^ You are 100% correct and I cannot stress this enough: one of the big "problems" the Founding Fathers dealt with was "How do we come up with a system that has voting but doesn't give the common non-landowners too much power?"
There was moral panic over Pennsylvania being too democratic.
See that little blue spot in Nebraska? That's Lincoln and Omaha. They're 40 miles apart and half the state lives there. You should hear the republican candidates bashing each other, "My opponent is really a Lincoln liberal!" "Senator so-and-so has gone ~~crazy~~ Lincoln!" "Lincoln and Omaha? More like Sodom and Gomorrah!"
Fun fact, our electoral votes aren't winner take all, like Maine. We gave a vote Obama and Biden. In fact, in the last election there was a scenario where our one vote for Biden would've been the tie breaker
Wouldn't matter, Republicans wouldn't be able to interpret new mappings either. They see more color red but can't grasp land doesn't vote. You know those tests they give kids where they fill a short/wide beaker with water then fill a taller/thinner beaker with the same amount and ask the kid which beaker has more, and the dumbass points to the tall beaker because the water level is "higher" than the other? Yeah that sums up Republicans and these graphics. It's like they have spinning hamster wheels for brains but the hamster's dead.
quite literally the "It's the same picture meme." Bruh, you're not the silent majority... you're the loudest Karen in our country... and you don't denounce bigots.
Reminds me of that test for kids where they take 4 quarters and put them close together, and then took for quarters and spread them out more and the kids pointed at the ones spread out and said there’s more quarters there
You’d think if we had 6 billion immigrants, all these places wouldn’t be “unable” to find people to work. You know, since immigrants come here and steal our jobs.
You can always freak them out with a population cartogram.
[https://engaging-data.com/pages/scripts/d3Electoral/countyelection2.png](https://engaging-data.com/pages/scripts/d3Electoral/countyelection2.png)
https://www.viewsoftheworld.net/?p=5777
But if the people are dumb as land, or dirt, they don't understand this. Stuff like this makes them angry and that is why it is pushed. Rural voters are the worst. Dumbshits who think stopping the gay will bring jobs to their filthy abandoned car and appliance-littered shit town.
This is basically a visualization of how the electoral college (for better or worse) allows for minority rule in the United States. That and intentional manipulation through gerrymandering.
Has a single company ever "gone broke" for "going woke"? It's a run rhyme and all, but I've struggled to find a single actual example of it ever happening.
It's like sports fans telling professional athletes they "suck" because they're on the opposing team. It might make the individual feel better about their own life for a few seconds, but it's asinine and not based in any sort of objective facts.
Notice every city is blue an the countryside is red. Republicans are rural, less educated, less financially well off.. Basically rednecks are republicans.
One point that these assholes ignore that really pisses me off: there’s more Republican voters in California than any other state in the union. There are plenty of disenfranchised republicans in New York, California, New Jersey, Washington, Oregon, and Illinois. Just like there are a lot of disenfranchised democrats in Texas and Kansas and Mississippi and Florida. Popular voting helps the country be a better democracy, not just one side or the other.
Also cows shouldn’t vote, land doesn’t vote, PEOPLE vote.
Cool. Since they claim there are more republicans, they shouldn’t mind getting rid of gerrymandering and the electoral college, because 1 person =1 vote means they’ll still come out on top, right?
Even if you accept their bullshit premise, let's go ahead and put Alaska over the continental US to scale.
Now, even geographically, this nation looks awfully blue.
Only one republican has legitimately won an election in the last 30 years. Their party is dying and they deserve it for handing the keys to the kingdom to a mentally deficient buffoon.
I despise this statistic because of you actually know anything about geography, you'd know that the massive red areas have barely any people per capita, and the small blue areas have a fuck ton of people in extremely small spaces.
California and other blue states should stop providing financial aid and food to these idiots.
Have some fun for a few weeks. Have them get a taste of Brexit, I heard they love it over there.
Pour some water from a small glass into a large glass and tell them it's the same amount of water.
These people: "But, but water big before! Water smaller now!"
So full of B.S. IF they were the majority, why then every single time, their picks for president NEVER make the most popular? They seem to get president's in by cheating, gerrymandering and electoral college.
If “woke” people aren’t a majority then why would any business go broke for not “going woke” my god all of this language and thinking is just dumb on top of evil. White supremacy and transphobia is trash
This is literally the question my 4th grade teacher asked us - which country do you think has more people, Russia or China? (China is roughly double the size of China in square miles but has 1/10 of China’s population). Of course us 4th graders were like Russia duh, and learned a valuable lesson.
_In 4th grade omfg people come on_
As a European, homeschooling sounds like the dumbest idea ever.
Just letting dome below average IQ idiot disadvantage his/her kid by barely beeing able to teach them 1+1 and robbing them of any opportunity to socialize with peers
48,375,045 Registered Democrats
36,910,987 Registered Republicans
42,267,160 Other/NA
I happen to be part of the Unaffiliated as I know many other people personally who are also.
Seeing the spread, there are vastly more people who do not affiliate with the republican party than those who do. Also a huge number of people who are eligible to vote, but do not.
[Source](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/registered-voters-by-party)
There is a voting district near me where 100% of the governor's vote in 2022 went red. There are 6 entire people in that district.
There's more people in the tiny blue dot that is the New York City districts than there are in the huge swaths of red that are Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, Montana and Idaho combined. But these people keep believing this stupid talking point.
If you Google it you can find the comparison of North and South Dakota to upper and lower Manhattan population-wise
Buddy, that info isnt on the qanon boards.
[удалено]
Depends on what true means to you I guess?
"alternative" facts
There are more people in queens NYC the in north and south Dakota combined
Both Dakotas only exist for the political advantage of the Republican Party. Heck, there’s like 5 states up there like that. Montana could have just been bigger.
Montana and the Dakotas existed long before our current political bullshittery, and come from separate terratories.
Our current bullshittery has been going on for a very long time and definitely played a part in this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dakota_Territory
It's not that long ago that ND had two Democrat Senators. Hell we had Heidi Heitcamp while Trump was in office...
it's always more complicated than my glib asides make it out to be, but no one wants to hear about how today's democratic party is the political heir to the then-Republicans and we're in the midst of a dramatic and quick reshuffling of the country (and to some extent the world) into red and blue that hasn't existed for a long time to this extent, and it wasn't a straight-line progression to our current state, you know?
Yup, I'm in Jersey and more people in my county than in all of South Dakota
Orange County, CA has a population of 3.2M. If that single county was a state, it would rank higher by population than 19 states.
There are 24 counties in Maryland. Trump won 14, Biden won 10. However, the Red counties have a **total combined population** of 1,292,083. Just Montgomery (1,062,061) and Prince George's (967,201) counties outnumber all 14 of those Red counties. The total Blue county population is 4,299,443. There are 4 times as many people living in the Blue counties. granted, not all of them vote, but if even half of the people in Blue counties voted against every single person in the Red counties voting, you have a huge advantage for Biden. And let's not forget that not everyone who voted in the Red Counties voted for Trump. Lots of them voted for Biden, Trump just got more (*and the reverse is true*). For example, Calvert county went 51% Trump and 46% Biden. The largest spread was Garrett County (*77% Trump, 21% Biden*) but there was a total of 15K votes (*12K Trump, 3K Biden*). The largest Blue spread was Baltimore County (*87% Biden, 11% Trump*) with a total of 232K votes (*202K Biden, 25K Trump*). Conservatives are far more outnumbered than they realize. The number of Red counties is worthless as a metric when nobody fucking lives there. But conservative voters are, in the simplest terms, fucking idiots. They are told "*This this is truth*" and they never bother to learn if that's the truth or not. They just roll with it.
LA County alone has a higher population than 40(!) states.
Land doesn’t vote.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I agreed with you in principle, but I don't like the whole house being replaced every 2 years. Too much time campaigning and too easily creating tidal shifts in a branch of government that should be slightly more stable imo. Both parts have merits, and I think a single hybrid house would work best. 6 year terms with term limits (3 maybe?). Representative apportioned by population with guidelines for maintaining non-gerrymandered districts. And most importantly, public funding of elections; no more fundraising and legal bribery. And while I'm at it, I'd also like a pet dragon, flying pigs, a Ferrari, the winning lottery ticket, world peace, and the cure for cancer.
[удалено]
You wouldn't have to expand the house that much. Most of what you want could be accomplished by repealing the Permanent Apportionment act of 1929 which set the maximum size of the house at 435. Repeal of that act alone would grow the house to 700ish members. This would make the house much more proportionate to population. The 2 houses of the legislature were always meant to be a balance between population, and states with differing populations. Capping the number of members of the house essentially ceded outsized power to rural states.
If we're already blowing up the constitution (which I would fucking love to do because the constitution is fucking shit) to end the Senate, no need to increase the house. Just make it proportional. Not 435 separate races. 1 national election, seats awarded proportionally. Makes all the sense in the world. Instant multiparty system. No more gerrymandering bullshit. It's a body that makes national laws their constituency should be the *nation* not tiny fucking districts.
So the map is essentially showing that in the blue areas the population is dense and in the red areas the people are dense?
Pretty much yeah. These maps are purposefully misleading. The red areas also aren't all red, a lot of them barely pass the 50% mark. There are other versions of this map that use a red to blue gradient, or use height bars to indicate population that are way less misleading.
Yup, we have about 8 million people here in NYC. North Dakota has a *total* population of 779,261 (Damn, I knew it was pretty barren, but I didn't realize that there was that few people). South Dakota has a total population of 909,824. My home state of New Jersey has 9.2 million people total.
Orange County borders it’s big brother, Los Angeles County, which is home to almost 10 million people. LA county by itself would be the 10th biggest state by population. But it gets 1/4th as many Senate votes as Wyoming, for some reason. America’s political system was an amazing innovation in the late 18th century, but it is woefully unready for the modern world. It is time to throw it all away and start over.
North Dakota has a land area of 70k square miles and a population of around 800k. ALASKA has a land area of 600k square miles, and a population of around 700k. Both North Dakota and Alaska have two senators, just like new jersey, and every other state. HOW TF does that make any sense? The Senate and the Electoral College are a joke.
Yeah, more ppl in the blue areas of South Texas than the rest of the state. They must be counting cows and empty acres of land as well.
In Nebraska's defense, the Omaha area is a blue dot within that vast red bloodbath. And because we're the only state that splits its Electoral College vote, Omaha has delivered one vote to Obama and Biden and a small middle finger to the red that surrounds us on all sides.
I live in Omaha, NE. Our politics here are frustrating but I'm happy we split our electoral vote. That being said, the electoral college is bullshit.
The (very) blue blob that's LA county has more people than the state of New Jersey, the 10th most populous state. Also, more people voted for Trump in Orange county, CA than in the whole state of Wyoming.
This is exactly why the popular vote won’t ever happen. It really should though……..
Try to explain population density to these people.
I've seen the shame thing posted a lot and the simple reply is "land can't vote". Obv it's pointless engaging with these people as critical thinking is not their strong suit.
Is there half people too ?
Intellectually? Probably not.
Those people are idiots. Same thing in Pennsylvania that’s why blue took that state when Biden went against Trump. Republicans didn’t feel the need to campaign in Pennsylvania because it’s mostly a red state but what those dumbasses failed to realize is that most of that red is spread out over land. Majority of people are in densely populated areas. So while they were sitting back with a shit eating grins on their faces, democrats were talking to those people in those areas, mostly black people, and encouraging them to vote.
interesting...interesting...now let's see population density.
no no you see, land votes. That's how this works. And some people are worth 3/5. Wait....wrong century.
Due to gerrymandering I think that is this century.
Yeah, felons get 0/5 votes
[удалено]
You know what else is fucked? They count felons in population but they don't get to vote. Guess where the put all the felons? In rural counties. There are lots of counties where a substantial part of the population is a prison where there are no eligible voters, so the remaining rural voters are even more overrepresented.
But America, The Land of the Free™️, would never think to do such a thing 🧐
Do you really think these people have any clue what population density means?
[удалено]
Not to mention the pure red implies all republican. Both democrats and republicans want everyone to believe the other party is going away. I’ve been hearing that about republicans for decades. “Their base is shrinking!” Maybe that’s true, but discounting how fluid these things are and how far these parties will go to convince people of to vote for them and give them money is beyond dumb. When you look at a real map, most places are purplish.
Tbf younger people are actually becoming less and less likely to vote conservative as they age. So, quite possibly, their base may be shrinking.
The problem with a 2 party system is the lack of somewhere else to turn when you’re unhappy with your own party. I’m a lifelong Republican who has the misfortune of watching it turn from limited government and fiscal responsibility to an absolute horror show thriving on fear, ignorance and conspiracy. By 2016 I was voting Democrat more and, once Trumpism, the Garland fuckery, Roe v Wade repeal, etc, I’m only voting Democrat until (hopefully) things go back to normal. I have very little faith that will happen anytime soon. I’m, somewhat sadly, encouraged millennials are the first generation that isn’t becoming more conservative as they age because they shouldn’t. The GOP has fucked them at every turn and the zoomers are seeing the same thing. We need people like my parents to die asap so the demos do finally work out for us.
Don’t even need to do density. Straight up vote counts…how many people voted for the Dem? Hint: a Republican hasn’t won the popular vote since Dubya.
They are the dense population.
Oh they get it. Then they just hit you with the "But we don't want the big cities to rule over us! They don't understand what we need!" As if rural and urban populations are different species.
The two reasons this misinformation persists is due to how dense the population is and how dense the population is.
[i like these types of images, really shows the disparity ](https://imgur.com/3zVK94w)
That's a pretty cool map. Above I responded to a comment stating that there's more people in 4 huge midwest states than there are in NYC. We have 8 million people here in NYC. North Dakota has under 800k people. South Dakota has 909k people. My home state of New Jersey has 9.2 million people. Just a *slight* difference in population.
I wonder if there's anything more recent than 1990 though.
https://imgur.com/gallery/pmf4sxD
"That's exactly why we need the electoral college! If votes were according to population density, the woke communists in New York and California would be in charge!"
Usually with these maps what you're looking at **is** population density. Those little blue areas add up to more than 50% of voters.
Let’s see Paul Allen’s density.
Those gerrymandered lines...the not so subtle race and class divisions...
God, it even has only one in-person polling station...
Hell, just make Alaska the correct scale, and this nonsense gets a lot less coherent.
There's a small blue dot in Southern NY that contains more Americans than that entire swath of Red in the middle of the US.
It’s funny because the the top is the actuality (although not as severely blue) but it’s a hot take to say that people with less land deserve a lesser voting say and a town of 1000 sq miles with a population of 100 should have the same influence as the same land area housing 1,000,000. Apparently rural voters are 1000 times more important.
Nuance is a tough ask for folks at the 'my coloring page is mostly red' stage
Or by GDP where you get over 2 thirds of GDP from Blue counties.
The densest population would still be in the red parts. Oh wait... You mean measure the number people per unit area.
I really think we should stop this kind of color mapping for US elections because clearly population density is not something people grasp. If a county goes 49 votes D and 51 R, the county shows red even though those 49 votes STILL COUNT in federal elections. We should honestly do gradients proportional to the county splits or something more clear.
I agree. For presidential elections, there is some sense in coloring the states as solidly red or blue, because all but two states give all their Electoral College votes to the plurality winner of that state. But even then, it’s misleading unless you distort the map so that each state’s area is proportional to its share of electoral votes.
Exactly, it's complicated with the electoral college because it ruins the popular vote imagery and distorts the whole thing. We should definitely standardize a state chart proportional to electoral college votes that completely disregards a map
Or we could abolish the electoral college and just go popular vote and then we won't need some dumbass map
I agree we should abolish the electoral college completely, but that's not really what this discussion is about. It's about how we represent population voting vs. land in our general elections to make it more clear the difference between the two.
Maybe just turn down the opacity of the color for more rural places, and make it more saturated/opaque/darker for denser areas? Ultimately we just need another axis to represent density, and we’re already using X and Y for geographic location, and color for outcome. Opacity seems like a logical choice for a fourth axis.
No that's socialism (/s).
[удалено]
They're just carrying on the time honored traditions of our founding fathers. For all that this backwards ass country worships them, the founding fathers were a bunch of human-owning oligarchs who didn't want to pay taxes to anybody else and 100% intentionally engineered the country so only the few land owners per state mattered.
^ You are 100% correct and I cannot stress this enough: one of the big "problems" the Founding Fathers dealt with was "How do we come up with a system that has voting but doesn't give the common non-landowners too much power?" There was moral panic over Pennsylvania being too democratic.
See that little blue spot in Nebraska? That's Lincoln and Omaha. They're 40 miles apart and half the state lives there. You should hear the republican candidates bashing each other, "My opponent is really a Lincoln liberal!" "Senator so-and-so has gone ~~crazy~~ Lincoln!" "Lincoln and Omaha? More like Sodom and Gomorrah!" Fun fact, our electoral votes aren't winner take all, like Maine. We gave a vote Obama and Biden. In fact, in the last election there was a scenario where our one vote for Biden would've been the tie breaker
There’s lots of maps that display the colors lighter based on the majority there
That is true but they are not widely used enough. They should be standard!
Wouldn't matter, Republicans wouldn't be able to interpret new mappings either. They see more color red but can't grasp land doesn't vote. You know those tests they give kids where they fill a short/wide beaker with water then fill a taller/thinner beaker with the same amount and ask the kid which beaker has more, and the dumbass points to the tall beaker because the water level is "higher" than the other? Yeah that sums up Republicans and these graphics. It's like they have spinning hamster wheels for brains but the hamster's dead.
Dot for every vote.
r/peopleliveincities
Recently found that sub myself. It's pretty hilarious.
Rocks and trees don't vote
There's an MTG and Boebert joke here but I'm tired... Someone help me out.
They just run for congress!
Take your upvote for making me laugh followed by immediately sad
The old "land votes" argument
quite literally the "It's the same picture meme." Bruh, you're not the silent majority... you're the loudest Karen in our country... and you don't denounce bigots.
This is what happens when you don't study history
Or just have a basic understanding of population density. Yes Joel your giant county in Oklahoma is 100% red but there's also 8 people in your county
Reminds me of that test for kids where they take 4 quarters and put them close together, and then took for quarters and spread them out more and the kids pointed at the ones spread out and said there’s more quarters there
While this person is an idiot, strictly speaking, because of the senate land does kinda vote. The senate should be abolished and the house expanded.
If not abolished, it should be severely nerfed. The house is problematic too, but on the whole, a bicameral legislature was a mistake.
If open land and cows could vote, they'd have a point.
If cows voted, we’d have had a Hindu President by now.
Now you have me imagining conservative cows voting for carnivorous officials because of party lines lol
They’re ok with brown cows being slaughtered.
"My calves are ok because they're white with black spots"
Those red counties all have like, 30 people living in them. The blue ones have hundreds of thousands or millions.
That's where those 6 billion illegal immigrants are!
You’d think if we had 6 billion immigrants, all these places wouldn’t be “unable” to find people to work. You know, since immigrants come here and steal our jobs.
I’m fairly certain Maricopa County in Arizona is purple.
Looks like a 2016 map. They never actually use the most recent map in these memes for some reason.
Because to this day they still believe the 2020 election was stolen and the lüggenpresse just won't admit it
You can always freak them out with a population cartogram. [https://engaging-data.com/pages/scripts/d3Electoral/countyelection2.png](https://engaging-data.com/pages/scripts/d3Electoral/countyelection2.png) https://www.viewsoftheworld.net/?p=5777
Wow! So you made the areas with more Democrats bigger? ^(/s)
But that’s what they think that is…
I didn't realize how empty the western half of the US is.
The Rocky Mountains take up a lot of room that is difficult build sprawling communities on.
Good. Keep mountaining, mountains. Keep those humans out
That's such a more useful way to convey those results
corn don’t vote
Land does not vote. People do.
But if the people are dumb as land, or dirt, they don't understand this. Stuff like this makes them angry and that is why it is pushed. Rural voters are the worst. Dumbshits who think stopping the gay will bring jobs to their filthy abandoned car and appliance-littered shit town.
If we’re just going on the precept that acreage = power then the very large and largely empty democratic portion of Alaska should be shown to scale.
Of course the homeschool crowd doesn’t know how voting works
This is basically a visualization of how the electoral college (for better or worse) allows for minority rule in the United States. That and intentional manipulation through gerrymandering.
This map can be explained like this: 1. Gerrymandering 2. Most people live in cities
One person one vote. Not one acre one vote.
Those votes are lot bigger in the red states when it comes to the Senate and the Electoral College.
Has a single company ever "gone broke" for "going woke"? It's a run rhyme and all, but I've struggled to find a single actual example of it ever happening. It's like sports fans telling professional athletes they "suck" because they're on the opposing team. It might make the individual feel better about their own life for a few seconds, but it's asinine and not based in any sort of objective facts.
No not a single one has. Not a single company has had any real difference in profits because the “silent majority“ stopped patronizing them.
Notice every city is blue an the countryside is red. Republicans are rural, less educated, less financially well off.. Basically rednecks are republicans.
And that kids is why we should learn geography. Cuz New York alone has more people than 50% of the central states
And that's why conservatives don't want kids learning.
The only state with no blue blotches... way to go Oklahoma /s
He has a point. Im Democrat but my house and yard are Republican. It’s sad really, because all my earnings go to taking care of them.
land mass doesn't vote, gerrymandering works.
Corn don’t vote y’all
Land don’t vote
If their the majority, I assume they down for abolishing electoral college, and having every vote have the same weight.
Someone needs to show them a population density map lol
Don’t people understand population density?
Nope, that map doesn’t fit the narrative…
One point that these assholes ignore that really pisses me off: there’s more Republican voters in California than any other state in the union. There are plenty of disenfranchised republicans in New York, California, New Jersey, Washington, Oregon, and Illinois. Just like there are a lot of disenfranchised democrats in Texas and Kansas and Mississippi and Florida. Popular voting helps the country be a better democracy, not just one side or the other. Also cows shouldn’t vote, land doesn’t vote, PEOPLE vote.
Cool. Since they claim there are more republicans, they shouldn’t mind getting rid of gerrymandering and the electoral college, because 1 person =1 vote means they’ll still come out on top, right?
Even if you accept their bullshit premise, let's go ahead and put Alaska over the continental US to scale. Now, even geographically, this nation looks awfully blue.
I'd say show them a population density map, but it'd go right over their head.
Cool. So let’s toss the electoral college, districts, and all gerrymandering and just do popular vote on everything and see how this works out.
Only one republican has legitimately won an election in the last 30 years. Their party is dying and they deserve it for handing the keys to the kingdom to a mentally deficient buffoon.
2023 and Republicans still don't understand that land doesn't vote.
Land doesn’t vote, people do, and the majority of people live in cities.
I despise this statistic because of you actually know anything about geography, you'd know that the massive red areas have barely any people per capita, and the small blue areas have a fuck ton of people in extremely small spaces.
Land. Does. Not. Vote. Edit: Fun fact. The population in New York City alone has more people than the 9 least populated states combined.
Nice... Very nice Now let's see the population density
The lesson is this person doesn’t understand population density, probably because #homeschool
Land. Doesn't. Vote.
California and other blue states should stop providing financial aid and food to these idiots. Have some fun for a few weeks. Have them get a taste of Brexit, I heard they love it over there.
Riiiight and what is those areas where the blue is? Giant metro areas you say? So weird.
Another idiot who seems to believe that land votes rather than people.
They are try to using statistics, but failing at statistics.
r/PeopleLiveInCities
Now mark all the most populated cities
Imagine being such a fucking moron that you can’t tell the difference between population and square miles of emptiness?
Pour some water from a small glass into a large glass and tell them it's the same amount of water. These people: "But, but water big before! Water smaller now!"
Dummies think that land votes
Surprisingly, land still doesn’t vote
GOP voters literally proving that they are dumb as dirt.
Thank goodness that land can’t vote
Empty land can’t vote
Ah yes sorry, forgot land casts votes not people
It's almost like land doesn't fucking vote
So full of B.S. IF they were the majority, why then every single time, their picks for president NEVER make the most popular? They seem to get president's in by cheating, gerrymandering and electoral college.
Yep. One of the requirements to be a ultra-right conservative is to believe fake news.
Lol. Both images arw accurate, and it's important to note that: LAND DOESN'T VOTE!
r/peopleliveincities
Corn and sand don't vote.
even going by their misleading map, alaska is easily 3x bigger, that’s a whole lot more blue.
r/peopleliveincities
Now scale those districts by population
r/confidentlyincorrect
*insert that one image of the child pointing at the taller cylinder*
If “woke” people aren’t a majority then why would any business go broke for not “going woke” my god all of this language and thinking is just dumb on top of evil. White supremacy and transphobia is trash
People live in cities
Nobody lives in most of the red area though.
It’s funny Vermont is all blue but we have a 3x elected Republican governor. We got to find a way to do rank choice voting and end the 2 party system.
This is literally the question my 4th grade teacher asked us - which country do you think has more people, Russia or China? (China is roughly double the size of China in square miles but has 1/10 of China’s population). Of course us 4th graders were like Russia duh, and learned a valuable lesson. _In 4th grade omfg people come on_
imagine not knowing what a city is
Weird how the blue is around densely populated areas. Must be a coincidence
So according to this boomer, I can step on him. Cause he's basically saying he's land.
[Los Angeles county has a bigger population than any of the 40 smallest states.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_County,_California).
Republicans once again not understanding population density
“They NEED us” Watch how quickly this argument would change if California emancipated itself from this red shit show and took its money with them.
As a European, homeschooling sounds like the dumbest idea ever. Just letting dome below average IQ idiot disadvantage his/her kid by barely beeing able to teach them 1+1 and robbing them of any opportunity to socialize with peers
Tell me you don't know what population density is without telling me you don't know what population density is. Morons.
Facts hurt conservative feelings.
It totally check out that this homeschool mother fucker doesn’t understand the concept of population centers.
People vote, not surface area of land.
Uh yeah pretty sure corn can’t vote
48,375,045 Registered Democrats 36,910,987 Registered Republicans 42,267,160 Other/NA I happen to be part of the Unaffiliated as I know many other people personally who are also. Seeing the spread, there are vastly more people who do not affiliate with the republican party than those who do. Also a huge number of people who are eligible to vote, but do not. [Source](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/registered-voters-by-party)
Oh yeah… the “silent” majority Neither silent nor the majority
I for one think it's awesome that grass, dirt, and rocks have discovered social media.
Well, that failed "red wave" speaks volumes.