I’ve seen several people claim that their state’s vote for the US presidential election doesn’t matter because their district is gerrymandered, which does not matter for most states.

Most states use the state’s popular vote to determine who the entire state’s electoral college votes go to. No matter how gerrymandered your district is*, every individual vote matters for assigning the electoral vote. [ETA: Nearly] Every single district in a state could go red but the state goes blue for president because of the popular vote.

*Maine and Nebraska are the notable differences who allot individual electors based on the popular vote within their congressional districts and the overall popular vote. It’s possible there are other exceptions and I’m sure commenters will happily point them out.

Edit: added strikethrough to my last statement because now I have confirmed it.

Of the 50 states, all but two award all of their presidential electors to the presidential candidate who wins the popular vote in the state (Maine and Nebraska each award two of their electors to the candidate who wins a plurality of the statewide vote; the remaining electors are allocated to the winners of the plurality vote in the states’ congressional districts). (source)

  • Today@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    It creates maps like this that make people stay home because they believe their vote doesn’t count.

    • TexasDrunk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yep. It creates voter apathy in statewide races. Texas is in the top 10 lowest in voter turnout. A lot of liberal folks don’t vote due to gerrymandering and due to shit like the state meddling in Harris county and the small number of voting locations in big blue areas.

  • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Not to nitpick, because I completely support what you’re saying, (EVERYBODY VOTE!!!) but, I don’t think it’s mathematically possible for EVERY district to go red and the electorals go blue.

    • Snazz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      20 days ago

      Theoretically the electorals could go blue without winning any districts. It would require a third party to win at least one district though.

  • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Do states have more or less electoral votes based on population?

    Like would California have more say in who becomes president than Idaho?

    Or is it that stupid system where each state has an equal amount of votes?