Homestead mailing list

["clanSkeen" <sgian AT planetc.com>]

> tvoivozhd---individual states ARE ignored if either party considers them
> "safe"., regardless of SIZE.

Yes, that's right.  But the difference between this and what I posited is
immense.  A conservative candidate need not go to a conservative "safe"
state if that state is going to vote for him anyway BECAUSE they expect that
the candidate will act in their benefit.  Likewise for a liberal state and
liberal candidate.  The candidate cannot simply say "Screw you."   But under
a popular vote, neither candidate need act in the interest of the people of
sparsely populated states nor even pretend to nor promise to.  They CAN (and
would) say "Screw you" and make it stick.

Since you are a Virginian I will remind you that SW Virginia, especially the
extreme SW (Scott, Lee, Wise, Russell, Buchanan, and Dickenson counties, for
example) have been utterly screwed over by the state for decades.  They
exact a high state tax on the coal removed from the local mines and spend it
all on the interests of the eastern seaboard.  Why?  Because the SW is
sparsely populated and can't dictate nor much influence state elections.
Just to the south, East Tennessee holds its own in population with the west
and middle sections of the state.   Although the culture and economy is very
similar to SW Virginia, we've never been screwed over since we can put a
governor or senator in office - or at least heavily influence it.   If the
country went to a popular vote, this would be the case for the whole
country.

Bad idea.


James