(03-26-2019, 12:56 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote:

(03-26-2019, 12:41 PM)mikesez Wrote: Most of them have no voice now.  The last time an outcome changed based on what a small state did was 2000. Gore could have won if he had won New Hampshire, and he did not lose New Hampshire by much. Since that time, no state with ten or fewer votes has really mattered in the math. The big swing States decide everything.

---

if you're only going to count actual voters in the denominator, then you should only count actual voters in the numerator as well. The ratio works out to about 17%, regardless.

Not sure how the numbers are the same if highly populated liberal cities have higher voter turnout and take up a bigger piece of the 125 million "pie".

I said they would be about the same. 
And the reason I put that extra word "about" in there was because the turnout rate can vary.
But it does not vary by much. Give me an example of why you think this is a problem. Can you show me a city that has a really high turnout in presidential elections compared to a rural area that has really low turnout? How big is the difference?

---