You're assuming that 318.9 million people in America actually vote. They don't. Big cities tend to get high voter turnout (obviously).
120,000,000 people voted this election..... If you cater to big cities and tell them what they want to hear you can get at least 23,000,000 votes (20% of the popular vote) out of them. If you don't see how big of a dent that actually is capable of being, you don't understand how elections work.
Zoomed in on the important part of the picture for you to read again:
The states being Nebraska, Montana, Iowa and Idaho |
You assume that everyone in the city votes lol.
http://www.amny.com/news/elections/n...ays-1.12594476
2.5 million of the 8.4 million living in NYC actually voted in the recent election. 2.5M out of 120M means NYC only accounted for 2.1% of the vote. That doesn't back your claim that big cities would control the vote in a popular vote. It actually contradicts that claim.
|
"Most of the country's states are decided before the election even starts."
^ doesn't make sense and clearly wasn't the case in this election.
|
States like California, Texas, and the many others. Yes. I would have bet my life on California going to the Democrats. The electoral college actually rigs the votes in favor of big states that control most of the vote. Cali has 55 of the 270 needed to win the election. California alone (no matter who you vote for, because it's all or nothing) gives a candidate 20% of the needed votes to win. Completely contradicts the whole point you claim the electoral college provides by making votes fair. It just gave California 20% of the votes someone needs to win an election.
To quote you: If you don't understand how the electoral college does the exact opposite of what you claim, you don't understand how elections work.