By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
the-pi-guy said:
Chrkeller said:

I completely disagree with section in bold.  We can make it federal law and/or state law.  We vote for our federal and state representatives.  A federal law was just blocked by the senate, based on who was voted into office...    

Each state gets two senators, gerrymandering doesn't happen with the senate...  the senate blocked the federal law.

On the contrary, the senate is basically fundamentally gerrymandered at its core.

We have states that have 40 million people with the same amount of representation as states with less than 1 million people.

Sure the lines aren't being actively changed, but it's the exact same outcome as gerrymandering. 

Chrkeller said:

And I realize polls say the majority of Americans are against the SCOTUS ruling....  but these same polls also had people not voting Trump in 2016.  Fact is a lot of people are hesitant to give their honest opinion out of backlash fear..  so I would be cautious with how much weight to give these polls.  At the end of the day people vote, and people are voting in pro-life representatives.  

Except Trump didn't win the majority of votes in 2016, he lost by 3 million votes.

When I looked at the state by state difference between the polls, what I found is that in general, the blue states went bluer than expected, and red states tended to go redder than the polls expected. It was not a case where people across the board voted more highly for Trump than expected.

Take Texas, 538 projected that Trump would win 51-42.5, instead he won 52.2-43.2. Both candidates got a higher share than expected, but Trump got even higher of a boost. 

Or California, expected to get 58.5-35.5, they ended up underestimating Clinton's win which ended up being 61.7-31.6. With a few exceptions this trend tends to hold. Bluer states like Colorado, Nevada tended to vote more heavily for Clinton than aggregated polls suggested, and redder states like Texas, Mississippi tended to vote more heavily for Trump.

The data doesn't suggest that people were afraid of backlash for their survey answers. If anything it suggests that more people than expected just didn't bother voting if they knew their candidate would, or you could argue that people ended up voting differently than they were polled because they were convinced or intimidated by family/friends.

Chrkeller said:

At the end of the day people vote, and people are voting in pro-life representatives.  

Rule by minority is still a thing. Democratic Senators represented almost 185 million people in 2021, and Republican Senators represented about 143 million, despite that both had 50 senators.

Second issue is that just because people say they're pro-life, doesn't mean they agree on the issue equally. A lot of people don't think there should be any exceptions, some people call themselves pro-life but do think there should be exceptions.

Right, but you are missing the point.  Red states via having over 50% of the population being female can have the senate being blue....