# Battleground states **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 23, 2016, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614 "2016-09-23T01:43:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/21 "2016-09-23T13:42:06Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > The OP is confusing “the need to campaign in State X” with “the amount of power State X has”. CA has the most power in determining who is president. The fact it normally goes for D doesn’t reduce its power. A presidential candidate can’t cater to FL at the expense of CA. If Hilary campaigned on adding a tax to movie and wine making, but reduce a tax on swamp land, she might win FL, but she’d lose CA. No she wouldn’t, (IMO, obviously). Not in this election. Trump = Hitler, haven’t you heard? Trump is going to destroy the country. yada yada yada. There are people in this state (CA) that actually believe that to be the literal truth. ---
**Author:** ![nate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nate/32/13085_2.png) [@nate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nate)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/22 "2016-09-23T16:35:55Z")
I do know one thing, if the president was elected by popular vote I’d actually get out and vote. I’m in a 66/33 red/blue state so me voting for Hillary is a waste of time as the state is 99.9% sure to go to Trump. My vote would actually count for something if the popular vote mattered. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/23 "2016-09-23T18:35:16Z")
On an individual level that’s a case to make it a popular vote contest. Obviously, though, in terms of how it affects the results, it’s irrelevant, because there are potential Republican voters who won’t vote for the same reason. So if it was a popular vote election, you’d go out - and so would two Republican voters, thus resulting in essentially the same outcome. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/24 "2016-09-23T18:51:17Z")
It probably wasn’t an intentional feature but our current system reduces election fraud. There’s a reason why when you hear about accusations of elections being stolen, it comes from places like Florida or Ohio. Committing fraud is like buying TV ads; it takes resources. And nobody wants to waste those resources. No presidential campaign is going to try to commit fraud in Massachusetts or Utah. So each campaign is able to focus its attention on watching its opponent in the handful of states where fraud would matter. If we had popular elections then fraud would be meaningful everywhere. Democrats would try to squeeze a few thousand more votes out of New York and Republicans would do the same in Texas. The outcome of every presidential election would end up getting contested in courts all over the country. ---
**Author:** ![DonLogan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/51bf81/32.png) [@DonLogan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DonLogan)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/25 "2016-09-23T19:34:55Z")
> [@boffking](#): > > Our entire constitution was set up to avoid giving too much power to any one state. What? ---
**Author:** ![nate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nate/32/13085_2.png) [@nate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nate)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/26 "2016-09-23T19:39:30Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > On an individual level that’s a case to make it a popular vote contest. Obviously, though, in terms of how it affects the results, it’s irrelevant, because there are potential Republican voters who won’t vote for the same reason. So if it was a popular vote election, you’d go out - and so would two Republican voters, thus resulting in essentially the same outcome. Yeah, but my vote would actually matter to some small degree and not get tossed out in a winner-take-all scenario. I know it is ultimately a winner-take-all process, but at least my vote would get to the finals instead of not making it out of the state. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/27 "2016-09-23T19:40:44Z")
> [@boffking](#): > > Why do Ohio, PA, and Florida, always decide presidential races? I think this is ridiculous and anti-democratic. Our entire constitution was set up to avoid giving too much power to any one state. Now it seems like a presidential candidate who has the support of their party can’t get anywhere without winning two of these three. Why do these states get so much attention and power in campaigns, especially when the ultimate electoral prizes of Texas, California, and NY are mostly ignored? > Also, what if the three battleground states divided their electors by congressional district like Maine does? Would that fix this problem? I don’t think it’s going to matter this year…from what I recall, Clinton has enough EC votes even without the ‘battleground states’ to win. Look at [this](http://www.cnn.com/election/interactive-electoral-college-map/) from CNN. Click on the ‘recommended’ starting map and take a look at where things are at right now. If you do, and then click on every state listed as in play (or ‘battleground’) and give it to Trump, he still loses. As for the broader question, I don’t think it’s something that needs to be ‘fixed’…it’s a non-issue. The reason those states are ‘battleground states’ is simply because they have a mixed population that could go either Democrat or Republican, as opposed to states that are pretty much always locked in as either one or the other in most elections. California and Texas are pretty much a lock for their respective parties (though, ironically, I’ve heard that Texas might actually be in play this year, though those predictions seem to be waning as the race tightens up). ---
**Author:** ![boffking](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/858c86/32.png) [@boffking](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boffking)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/28 "2016-09-23T22:12:29Z")
> [@DonLogan](#): > > What? It’s why we have the electoral college in the first place (it’s not implemented well though). Also, it’s the reason the Senate isn’t proportional. The founding fathers didn’t want the big states running roughshod over the small ones. ---
**Author:** ![Tzigone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Tzigone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tzigone)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/29 "2016-09-23T23:00:54Z")
> [@mlees](#): > > No she wouldn’t, (IMO, obviously). Not in this election. Trump = Hitler, haven’t you heard? Trump is going to destroy the country. yada yada yada. There are people in this state (CA) that actually believe that to be the literal truth. There are people in Alabama who believe that about Obama. Still, after almost 8 years. There are people who believe that about every candidate. I’ve seen polls indicating the percentage of the US population that respond that they believe Obama is the Antichrist (well, probably really mean Beast of Revelation, but poll said Antichrist). A bit of that is undoubtedly hyperbolic, but the “rally to restore sanity” on Comedy Central last presidential election cycle had a “I disagree with you, but I’m pretty sure you’re not Hitler” joke. I read conspiracy theories about Bush declaring martial law and delaying/canceling election back in 2007. I’ve read people seriously propose that the president (or candidate) is Antichrist and try to jam them in prophecies from Revelation and Nostradamus and others for both Bush and Obama. The same was probably true for Clinton, but I didn’t follow politics back then. There’s always someone who believes the candidate(s) not of their persuasion will destroy the country. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/30 "2016-09-23T23:07:55Z")
> [@boffking](#): > > It’s why we have the electoral college in the first place (it’s not implemented well though). Also, it’s the reason the Senate isn’t proportional. The founding fathers didn’t want the big states running roughshod over the small ones. They also didn’t want the population running roughshod over states. And I think the electoral college is implemented EXACTLY as the Framers intended. Whatever you think may be wrong with it is probably a problem for the conception, not its operation. ETA: which is of course a totally legitimate criticism, I’m just saying we should not fool ourselves. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/31 "2016-09-23T23:08:03Z")
> [@boffking](#): > > I think this is ridiculous and anti-democratic. How is it antidemocratic? Just because the campaign is more active in Ohio doesn’t mean that Texas is being disenfranchised. In terms of democracy, it means nothing that candidates are paying more attention to one place than another. It doesn’t actually give any more political power to Ohio. > [@](#): > > Also, what if the three battleground states divided their electors by congressional district like Maine does? Would that fix this problem? The House of Representatives districts are gerrymandered to within an inch of their lives to heavily favor Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![DinoR](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dinor/32/2821_2.png) [@DinoR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DinoR)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/32 "2016-09-23T23:43:46Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Is any state concretely moving in this direction? That direction - not that I’ve seen.There is a [National Popular Vote](http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/) initiative that has been passed into law by 11 states (RI, VT, HI, DC, MD, MA, WA, NJ, IL, NY, CA) with 165 electoral votes. Basically it’s a movement to sidestep a constitutional amendment by having states passing a law to award their Electors to the winner of the PV… once states possessing a total of 270+ votes all have the same law. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/33 "2016-09-24T00:01:41Z")
> [@DinoR](#): > > That direction - not that I’ve seen.There is a [National Popular Vote](http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/) initiative that has been passed into law by 11 states (RI, VT, HI, DC, MD, MA, WA, NJ, IL, NY, CA) with 165 electoral votes. Basically it’s a movement to sidestep a constitutional amendment by having states passing a law to award their Electors to the winner of the PV… once states possessing a total of 270+ votes all have the same law. Are you talking about Electors being apportioned within the State, like Maine and Nebraska? The other States use the “winner take all” method. I don’t think it matters if 270 Electoral Votes worth of States pass this law, the others aren’t required to do the same. That actually takes a Constitution Amendment. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/34 "2016-09-24T00:04:58Z")
> [@mlees](#): > > No she wouldn’t, (IMO, obviously). Not in this election. Trump = Hitler, haven’t you heard? Trump is going to destroy the country. yada yada yada. There are people in this state (CA) that actually believe that to be the literal truth. Maybe because it is the literal truth. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/35 "2016-09-24T00:13:40Z")
> [@Tzigone](#): > > There are people in Alabama who believe that about Obama. Still, after almost 8 years. Yes, and they are un-persuadable. Recently, a right-wing relative tried to tell me that Obama would declare martial\* law, cancel the elections, and be President-for-life. When I replied that he’d better get a move on, then – out of his 8 years, ne’s now down to barely 40 days to do that. Then this relative told me that of course Obama was late getting this done, you know those n\*\*\*\*rs never get work done on time! Sigh. I just changed the subject – no point in trying to have a discussion on this, \*Actually, he kept saying marital lay (as in marriage). I was tempted to say that if he meant violations of marital law, he must have been thinking of Bill Clinton or Jack Kennedy – but I knew that would also be a pointless discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Chessic\_Sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7c8e57/32.png) [@Chessic\_Sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chessic_Sense)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/36 "2016-09-24T00:42:12Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I disagree. If you asked Clinton if she’d trade five thousand votes in New York for a thousand votes in Ohio, she’d happily agree even though it would lower her overall vote total. And surprisingly, Trump would happily agree to the exact same trade. > > The important point isn’t how many votes you get in total; it’s whether you get at least 51%. Once you’ve got the majority of votes in a state, extra votes don’t help you. And if you fail to get the majority of votes in a state, none of the votes helped you. Yeah, and that’s just the way Ohio likes it. New York doesn’t like it, but they can’t stop Ohio from awarding electors however it likes, and Ohio is happy with the “thousand me’s equal five thousand you’s.” If you live in Ohio, contact your state representatives. If you don’t…suck it.:eek: > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > An incremental change not needing a constitutional amendment is doable: Maine and Nebraska have already moved from a “popular vote takes the whole state” to “popular vote takes the district’s EC vote, popular vote overall takes the two extra EC votes”. Other states could also do so, though it would help significantly if gerrymandering was banned outright so the districts won’t be as “locked” as many of the states currently are. But it’s a prisoner’s dilemma. Your state is doing its best to put the candidate of its choice in office. So mine ought to as well, or else you get too much say. > [@septimus](#): > > If we agree that it’s bad when the popular-vote winner does not win the EC-vote, get ready for the likelihood of bad outcomes! I, for one, do not agree. There’s a limit to how much surging popularity in just one state ought to help a candidate. > [@nate](#): > > Yeah, but my vote would actually matter to some small degree and not get tossed out in a winner-take-all scenario. I know it is ultimately a winner-take-all process, but at least my vote would get to the finals instead of not making it out of the state. Your vote does matter. You voted on who your state should support 100%. You are, I take it, outvoted. So either lobby your fellow citizens or lobby the legislature to change the rule. Sound impossible? _That’s the way they like it._ ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/37 "2016-09-24T01:11:31Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > Yeah, and that’s just the way Ohio likes it. New York doesn’t like it, but they can’t stop Ohio from awarding electors however it likes, and Ohio is happy with the “thousand me’s equal five thousand you’s.” > > If you live in Ohio, contact your state representatives. If you don’t…suck it. But it’s not a stable situation. Any situation where a minority has disproportionate power is subject to the majority equalizing the power. If five states are getting extra presidential largess, then eventually the other forty-five states are going to change the rules. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614/38 "2016-09-24T01:15:16Z")
Fellas, if voting could change anything, they wouldn’t let us do it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleground-states/766614.md?page=1)