Jump to content

Meaningless Election Statistics


Mark Beesley

Recommended Posts

Some totally meaningless statistics from the election.

Four states were entirely Red, i.e, Obama failed to carry a single county:

Alaska

West Virginia

Oklahoma

Utah

Four states were entirely Blue, i.e. Romney failed to carry a single county:

Hawaii

Vermont

Rhode Island

Massachusetts (Romney's home state)

Out of 114 counties in MIssouri, Obama won in three of them, one of which was Jackson County. (Perhaps the best argument for a religion based outcome. :) )

Hancock County, the home of Nauvoo and Carthage, voted for Romney. (Perhaps the best argument against a religion based outcome. :) )

Link to comment

Out of 114 counties in MIssouri, Obama won in three of them, one of which was Jackson County. (Perhaps the best argument for a religion based outcome. :) )

Community of Christ...and their apostate influences for social progression.

Hancock County, the home of Nauvoo and Carthage, voted for Romney. (Perhaps the best argument against a religion based outcome. :) )

Ha ha ha! Nice try, bud.

Link to comment

Is there anything more irrelevant in Nebraska other than Winter Quarters and Doane College?

:shok: ??? :huh:

P.S.: To paraphrase Inigo Montoya, I'm wondering if that statement means what you think it means?!

Link to comment

Some totally meaningless statistics from the election.

Four states were entirely Red, i.e, Obama failed to carry a single county:

Alaska

West Virginia

Oklahoma

Utah

Four states were entirely Blue, i.e. Romney failed to carry a single county:

Hawaii

Vermont

Rhode Island

Massachusetts (Romney's home state)

Out of 114 counties in MIssouri, Obama won in three of them, one of which was Jackson County. (Perhaps the best argument for a religion based outcome. :) )

Hancock County, the home of Nauvoo and Carthage, voted for Romney. (Perhaps the best argument against a religion based outcome. :) )

This is almost completely (but not entirely) off-topic, but does anyone (else) think we should we make the Electoral College proportional? ;)

Link to comment

This is almost completely (but not entirely) off-topic, but does anyone (else) think we should we make the Electoral College proportional? ;)

We already can. It is up to each state to decide how their electoral votes are distributed. Maine and Nebraska kind of already do.

The reason no state wants to change:

1. It would weaken the "prize" of being won and cause candidates to campaign less there.

2. The party in power in the state legislature will probably also carry the vote for the Presidency and there is no reason to weaken that support.

No. I think we should do away with it entirely.

Philistine. Election night would be much more dull if states weren't changing colors and all we had to look at was numbers going up.

Fun Fact: The original purpose of the Electoral College was probably to let Congress select the President and Vice-President and just have the Electoral College pick candidates. :)

Link to comment
This is almost completely (but not entirely) off-topic, but does anyone (else) think we should we make the Electoral College proportional? ;)
That would be akin to abolishing it, and yes, I think we should abolish it.

We should NOT abolish this constitutional check and balance on a few large (populous) states controlling the rest of the country. Because of the electoral college, a small amount of power is transferred to the smaller states because every state has two Senators regardless of population; each state gets an electoral vote for each member of Congress, House and Senate.

Link to comment
Some totally meaningless statistics from the election.

Here's one that's not meaningless by a long shot:

In the fierce headline debate over the so-called fiscal cliff, our newly reelected president argues that “a majority of Americans agree with [his] approach.” That approach, according to the president, is “to combine spending cuts with revenue — and that means asking the wealthiest Americans to pay a little more in taxes.”

Well, that’s not exactly what the exit polls said.

To the question “Should taxes be raised to help cut the budget deficit?” only 33% answered “yes” while 63% responded “no.” Isn’t that interesting? Nobody’s talking about this exit-poll nugget.

http://www.nysun.com...aying-no/88069/

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...