Does Your Vote Matter if You Live in a Red State or a Blue State?

That's so much truer than I'd like.

Makes 2 of us

How about whomever gets the most votes wins? Seems simple, then every vote counts - What do the states have to do with it? Why electoral votes? Doesn't make sense.

It's set up that way to prevent mob rule. A true democracy is as ugly as any dictatorship. It's one of the reasons our government was set up that way. One of the best articles I've seen is here http://www.lexrex.com/enlight...
Spells out the reasoning of our founders and what they accomplished and addressed as well as explaining the differences in each particular area.

Never has except in a couple of close races. I am not a fan of the electoral college, but I vote regardless.

Your vote always matters. Don't like it, vote third party. It's the only way to topple the electoral college, enough third party votes and it will fall.

How many do you figure is needed? Perot got 18.9% (nearly 20 million) of the vote in 1992 and still lost by infinity-0.

Obviously more than that. Honestly, WAY more than that. As in, the majority, I would say well over 50%

..as we found out in 2000, when the candidate with the FEWEST popular votes was appointed president by the supreme court, that it doesn't matter whether you're in a red state, a blue state or a pink state; your vote is meaningless and doesn't matter AT ALL!! The scumbags will put the worst possible person in as president they can find; that's how we got stuck with that incompetent "w"...

The Supreme Court didn't appoint Bush the president, they ruled the constant recount (especially of only a few handpicked counties) was unconstitutional. 50,456,000+ didn't agree that the the worst possible person became president.

What's worse, in the question of Florida in 2000, is that in a time when technology is/was so available that they were still using punch card ballots, why not ask everyone to bring a number 2 pencil next time?

Not really. Only if you live in a swing state.

I do and I plan to vote.

I am non-union so I will only be voting once.

LMAO - So true

*SNORT*

How true!

I bet you are a republican. Therefore, we can't be sure you actually live in a swing state, that you do plan to vote or that you do vote it will only be once.

That didn't make much sense.

Really? Did you look at what I was responding to? If you look at the comment I was responding and still don't get it I will explain it ti you.

Nope, not a Republican.

I say vote early and vote often, Vote Republican. Lets get rid of the Demorats and the Union leaches in this country.

Californians against Big Government and higher taxes need to move out of the state.

Send the small government people to Nevada. We need them.

No... stay out of Nevada. Last time we had an influx of Californians it didn't turn out well. (And I am not speaking politically, but more for the state's economy.)

Immigration is great if it's legal.

I say COME ON IN as long you don't bring California liberalism with you!

I disagree. :( Part of the reason we are in such a dismal housing mess is because of Californians coming and driving up housing costs, and then leaving.

You are confused.

People moving in is good for business.

The housing mess was caused by government forcing lenders to make loans to people whose credit and earnings did not deserve it.

When Barney Frank coerces lenders to make loans to people he considers 'less fortunate' guess what happens?

The unearned loans drive up prices because more people with more credit who make bad decisions enter the jumbo market.

When they default (as many did) the bankruptcies artificially drive the prices down.

So what does Obama do? Furthers the problem by 'bailing out' people who caused the problem.

Who gets hurt? The idiots that follow the rules.

Need proof? How did so many home owners get rich on their homes in California in the 80's and 90's?

PEOPLE MOVED INTO California. No artificial loans, no bail outs.

This is how you build wealth, by building REAL value not the fake value of a left-wing government official.

This is something the left either does not understand or denies because it flies in the face of their left-wing policies.

Yes, it is good when they come and stay. But the problem is so many came and left.

Businesses come in and they hire employees and then they decide they don't like Nevada, laying off all they hired. Some follow and some don't.. but it does not help matters.

Yes, I understand that loans were given to people who probably shouldn't have had them. But then again, loans were given to people who just sometimes bad things happen to.

I don't know what part of Nevada you are in, but I'd much prefer they come, give us their $$$ via tourism.

You will never build equity in your home until stable people move into the state.

Growth helps build wealth.

People leave when the economy tanks.

The economy tanks when government interferes.

Want prosperity? Let the free market do what it always does.

Stable people are key. :)

fine your state can have all the illegals.

No thanks although I would take the average illegal alien over Harry Reid.

We have never had a free market. It has always been a controlled market because all governments set up the commercial reigns. So free markets are an illusion and misnomer. The US economy sent the world into recession with the housing market. That was caused by lack of control from the private sector. Homes were pushed onto people that could not afford them with ARMS agreements. Lenders were approving loans they would not have approved if they had to keep the loan full term. Of course Fannie Mae and Freddie had inadequate software that added to bad assessment of loans. But the whole fall of the US housing market was human emotion. That is the unseen hand of what remnants we have of free market capitalism. From child pornography to drugs to slavery, it has to be regulated by a government and that keeps us from having the so called free market. Everything the market wants is not necessary or beneficial to society. Most economies have prostitutes. Are they really beneficial to the society or part of an internal want? Every manner of business act in order to produce a profit is not beneficial to a society. When your operations become counter productive to the well being and whole of the society for the sake of increasing monetary wealth for a few, you have to re-evaluate your purpose in society.

Ditto, art you nailed it, listen an learn grasshopper.

Can you explain how a small government with a large population works? It's better to have no government than an inadequate government because an inadequate government will be the easiest to be corrupt and to buy. Which is really what the right is looking for anyway.

Works great.

What works great? A Small hat on a large head? Same principle. But the US will never have to worry about a small government. It spends more on defense than any five nations combined. So unless some one wants to stop policing the world and trim the military budget to a rational size the small government thing is just a dream.

We can transform the military away from large bases to missiles and drones with specialized units based largely in North America.

That could easily cut the budget in half.

Unfortunately they bring the disease with them!

Or be real men and women and fight back be heard.

you should always vote and remember there is more than just one election.
The more people vote, the better. Means the politicians will have to do more than just keep 25% of the population happy and everyone else can go to hell.