3 electoral votes for ever (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 03:47:12 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 100% pro-life no matter what)
  3 electoral votes for ever (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Which state(s) will not get allocated more than 3 electoral votes in the next 50 years?
#1
Alaska
#2
Delaware
#3
Montana
#4
North Dakota
#5
South Dakota
#6
Vermont
#7
Wyoming
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results


Author Topic: 3 electoral votes for ever  (Read 2646 times)
Padfoot
padfoot714
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,532
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: -6.96

« on: October 29, 2011, 02:15:33 AM »

You do know that Alaska has nearly a million people living in it, right?

They're still about 300,000 shy of the million mark actually.  At their current growth rate it will still take them another 25-30 years to hit 1 million.  I suppose that still puts them within the 50 year parameter of this poll but I think it may be a bit premature to say that Alaskans number "nearly a million."

North Dakota, Wyoming, and Vermont are the three I think have the greatest chance to remain at 3 EVs for the foreseeable future.  The others all have a somewhat reasonable shot at hitting 4 EVS.

As a historical aside, ND lost its 4th EV after the 1970 census, SD after 1980, and MT after 1990 so it would be kinda interesting to see them rebound.  As for the other states, Vermont had at least 4 EVs up until the early 20th Century and Delaware had 4 EVs once for a single decade after the 1810 census.  Alaska and Wyoming have always had the minimum.

As a second aside on apportionment in general, I think the wide population disparity between our 3 EV states should be sufficient proof that we need more representatives.  I think Congress should strive for a nationwide 1:500,000 representative to resident ratio after each census.  That would give us about 600 members of the House based on the current population.
Logged
Padfoot
padfoot714
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,532
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: -6.96

« Reply #1 on: October 30, 2011, 10:40:20 AM »

I think any state with oil and gas has growth potential, and Delaware is too close to major metropolitan areas; I picked Vermont, whose greatest growth potential probably lies with retired and/or independently wealthy liberals seeking a small-town lifestyle.

Generally proximity to a major metro area is a great predictor of future growth.  Most of the population is in the north and is part of the Philadelphia metro area. 
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.027 seconds with 14 queries.