America in 2050: Teaser

[sentinel]

I'm going to start this timeline relatively soon. The first few updates will include one decade until we arrive at the 2052 elections.  I wanted to post a little gift to spark people's interest.

Ignore the colors (and Nebraska/Maine's CD's), I was lazy and didn't change them from 2008.

and there is a key element missing from this map that I was unable to include!

[Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)]

Since I'm too lazy to do the math, how many seats are there in the House, now?

and there is a key element missing from this map that I was unable to include!

I'm willing to bet this means there are additional states, as well.

[sentinel]

Since I'm too lazy to do the math, how many seats are there in the House, now?

and there is a key element missing from this map that I was unable to include!

I'm willing to bet this means there are additional states, as well.

At the point in the timeline that I based the map on, there will be 735 Representatives, 839 Electoral Votes

[feeblepizza]

Cali with 88? Texas with 75? Florida with 55? I don't know about that....

[sentinel]

Since I'm too lazy to do the math, how many seats are there in the House, now?

and there is a key element missing from this map that I was unable to include!

I'm willing to bet this means there are additional states, as well.

At the point in the timeline that I based the map on, there will be 735 Representatives, 839 Electoral Votes

The first post will be 2010-2020, explaining the decade in full (general overview) and what happens. It will be a long post. The second one 2020-2030, then third 2030-2040 and the last before the timeline begins will be something like 2040-2048/2052 then it will continue slowly from 2048/2052 onward. Something like that. This is the plan I will be straying from.



Oh okay. Just so I'm clear, the electoral map/results in your first post have nothing to do with the timeline, right? It's just a basis from which you'll explain your updated 2052 map.

[kohler]

By 2012, The National Popular Vote bill could guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
   
Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections.  Elections wouldn't be about winning states. No more distorting and divisive red and blue state maps.  Every vote would be counted for and directly assist the candidate for whom it was cast. Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation, not just undecided voters in a handful of swing states.

The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes--that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for president.

The bill has been endorsed or voted for by 1,922 state legislators (in 50 states) who have sponsored and/or cast recorded votes in favor of the bill.

In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided). The recent Washington Post, Kaiser Family Foundation, and Harvard University poll shows 72% support for direct nationwide election of the President. Support for a national popular vote is strong in virtually every state, partisan, and demographic group surveyed in recent polls in closely divided battleground states: Colorado-- 68%, Iowa --75%, Michigan-- 73%, Missouri-- 70%, New Hampshire-- 69%, Nevada-- 72%, New Mexico-- 76%, North Carolina-- 74%, Ohio-- 70%, Pennsylvania -- 78%, Virginia -- 74%, and Wisconsin -- 71%; in smaller states (3 to 5 electoral votes): Alaska -- 70%, DC -- 76%, Delaware --75%, Maine -- 77%, Nebraska -- 74%, New Hampshire --69%, Nevada -- 72%, New Mexico -- 76%, Rhode Island -- 74%, and Vermont -- 75%;  in Southern and border states: Arkansas --80%, Kentucky -- 80%, Mississippi --77%, Missouri -- 70%, North Carolina -- 74%, and Virginia -- 74%; and in other states polled: California -- 70%, Connecticut -- 74% , Massachusetts -- 73%, Minnesota -- 75%, New York -- 79%, Washington -- 77%, and West Virginia- 81%.  

The National Popular Vote bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers, in 21 small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in Arkansas (6), Connecticut (7), Delaware (3), The District of Columbia  (3), Maine (4), Michigan (17), Nevada (5), New Mexico (5), New York (31), North Carolina (15), and Oregon (7),  and both houses in California (55), Colorado (9), Hawaii (4), Illinois (21), New Jersey (15), Maryland (10), Massachusetts (12), Rhode Island (4), Vermont (3), and Washington (11). The bill has been enacted by the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington. These seven states possess  76 electoral votes -- 28% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.
   
See NationalPopularVote.com

[sentinel]

I'm very aware of the bill. Thanks