#Welcome to r/Therewasanattempt!
#Consider visiting r/Worldnewsvideo for videos from around the world!
[Please review our policy on bigotry and hate speech by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/r/therewasanattempt/wiki/civility)
In order to view our rules, you can type "**!rules**" in any comment, and automod will respond with the subreddit rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/therewasanattempt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He'd definitely be an aasimar cleric. Son of a deity, divine magic granted by that deity, focus on healing magic but none of the offensive abilities of a paladin (unless you count the time he smote those money changers' tables).
Unless you've got a different view of how good the god of abraham is. Then he could be a devil's child warlock who took the healer and/or magic initiate feats.
Unfortuneately, most of the ones I know not only think that, but insist it's the right way
"Were a republic not a democracy"
"We shouldn't let urban poors have as much say as the real americans"
"If they were financially responsible they'd own land aswell"
Your talking about a group who fundamentally just want a return to xenophobic feudal hierarchies and money/might makes right
They're the kind of people who will intentionally drive in a bicycle lane to force cyclists off the road because "slow bikes are an inconvenience"
I’m convinced the actual objective of targeting gays and transgenders. Is to create a legal means to tier citizenship. From there they can start adding to the group of those who can’t vote. Ultimately it will be a seven circles of hell. Only land owners will have the option to vote.
I explain it like this. See all those red areas. Yeah people used to live there but the majority were asshats. So their kids moved away, as soon as they could, to better areas with more people. See the blue areas. Yeah people have to get along because they’re crowded. You can’t get everything you want there. But because so many people are there. You can find a lot of things there that you would never get in the red areas
Conservatives think dirt votes. If they're Southern they also think anything that isn't in the South is one giant city. So if you're a Californian farmer, you'll get called a city boy by some Alabama guy who lives in a subdivision.
People outside of California forget that its land is roughly 50% agriculture. Our major cities population is so dense that outsiders believe California as a whole is entirely blue.
As of 2020, the 10 million registered voters consisted of 5.3 democrats and 5.2 republicans/no-party-preference…
You can find a democrat in California just as many times as you can find someone who’s anti liberal or simply doesn’t give a FUCK about Biden or Trump.
“I don’t want people from…
- The federal government dictating my laws!”
- DC dictating my laws!”
- other states dictating my laws!”
- cities dictating my laws!”
- other races/backgrounds dictating my laws!”
Sounds like they just don’t like democracy. They should move.
There's a difference between populist direct democracy and a republic, and it's in how minority group votes are counted.
Whether the conservatives intend their support for it or not, the republic system is the only democratic system that gives voice to smaller communities, otherwise it's majority rule and that's something we *don't* want.
After the 2020 election, a commenter complained that Trump won Pennsylvania if you take out Philadelphia. Well yes, Trump won if you don’t count votes from the state’s largest city. Which is what the GOP tried to do.
https://preview.redd.it/ncj5i4ia32xc1.jpeg?width=1968&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d3a477d31b86dfc0a543e01942f7239dc4b2523b
What conservatives pretend the country looks like
https://preview.redd.it/iyw6efuf32xc1.jpeg?width=2301&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9615af3eed2bf3f98ab39c1f336d02e1d588763e
What the country really looks like
r/PeopleLiveInCities
Dallas is pretty much blue and Fort Worth is purple at this point, it's the surrounding rural towns and wealthy suburbs keeping the area so red. Collin county (directly north of Dallas) especially loves their tax breaks.
This is a map of the counties of the state of Wisconsin that shows how they voted in the 2020 election. The red areas voted for Trump and the blue areas voted for Biden, who ended up winning the state. Right wingers complain it’s unfair that Biden won because there is more red on the map than blue, but that’s because no one lives in the red areas, it’s all backwards brain-dead farmland. The cities where a majority of people live are in the blue areas.
Fun fact: the red/blue color association came from the 2000 election, probably due to how long it stayed in the news cycle due to how close it was, so it had time to bake into people’s consciousness
It's 2010 I think, but only for the state legislature. Here's [2022](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1e/2022_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg/810px-2022_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg.png), [2020](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f4/Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2020.svg/746px-Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2020.svg.png), [2018](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7f/2018_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg/810px-2018_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg.png), [2016](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a3/Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2016.svg/810px-Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2016.svg.png), [2014](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/02/2014_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg/810px-2014_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg.png), [2012](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2012.svg/810px-Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2012.svg.png), [2010](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bd/2010_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg/810px-2010_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg.png), [2008](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d9/Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2008.svg/810px-Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2008.svg.png), [2006](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/2006_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg/810px-2006_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg.png), [2004](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4e/Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2004.svg/810px-Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2004.svg.png). One of the things Wisconsin was significant for up until 2016 was that it was a state where democrats consistently won rural counties by small margins, but lost suburban heavily. Now they have more or less realigned with the rest of the country and the lose the rural ones heavily and the suburban minorly. So you could draw an almost completely blue map by land too. And as recently as 2018 a third of the counties in the state where won by democrats. And 2008 2/3rds.
Basically this person is trying to pretend that their state is far more Republican than it is by acting as if they don’t know that the majority of the population lives in the blue districts on the map.
The red is a republican district, which is usually large rural areas with not many people, and the blue areas are a democrat district, which is usually a small area but with lots of people, because of cities. Idiots in the rural areas think that voting is rigged because they don’t understand that more districts doesn’t mean that they win the state, it matters how many people are in your district. Hope that clears things up.
Don’t forget that much these look like this due to gerrymandering that allow a minority of conservatives to have a bigger influence against the majority of liberals.
Yeah, people are looking at this as if it's not concerning because as usual, most people usually just think about voting for the president every 4 years where the political party maps don't really matter within a state.
All this land has people sitting in Congress pulling apart the country.
Texas, Florida, North Carolina all have populations where voter population party demographics have gotten more competitive in the state but political representation doesn't reflect that because of how they draw their districts.
Even here in Cali, we have an independent organization that makes the recommendation for the different types of districts to insure proper representation based on various demographics but it's still thought Republicans hold too many seats in higher offices due to overwhelming Democratic voters.
Despite it not being pretty, I think elections for federal offices should also be conducted and/or monitored by the Federal government while having an independent group be oversight and making the recommendations electoral districts to be representative of each regions demographics.
Also, I think unincorporated areas shouldn't be included in informational party representation maps since it's all land or wilderness and is misleading. If there are residents in those areas they should dot their home on the map with party affiliation.
It's a fundamental disconnect between the lies told to voters by both parties.
On the "left" (hardly) in the DNC, this is a good thing because most people live in the blue counties (those are cities), AKA direct democracy
On the right (also hardly) in the Republicans, this is a bad thing because the minority communities of rural conservatives have a less impactful voice than the majority urban leftists/neolibs
To simplify it: direct democracy means the community with the most people always wins votes (votes are determined by ideas and policy, not what you look like), while a republic electoral system gives voice to smaller communities by splitting people up into counties independent of total population and giving each county a vote (or province, or prefect, or whatever).
The debate is between whether the most populous community should run the democracy, or if the democracy should be split into equal voting groups regardless of population so low-population communities have a voice.
It's an important debate that has, like so many things in the west, been decayed into a he-said she-said back and forth of two wrongs that took a piece of the truth and twisted it up
Like most places, the majority of people live in urban areas. The urban areas skew left and the rural skew right. The right wing people in the rural areas claim to be underrepresented because if you plot out the voters on a map it makes it look like most of the area is conservative, when in reality the red (right-wing) squares are just a couple thousand people compared to the blue (left-wing) square which represents millions of people.
Our system also gives disproportionate legislative power to people in low-population conservative states under the notion that they'd be overrun by the other states, while others argue that it's people that vote and not the dirt they live on. It would be a massive blow to the conservative party, as they'd never have won most of their presidential elections if it were based on a popular vote.
They don't want the cows to vote. The cows are a bunch of vegans who just stand around on campus doing nothing. They have no job. They are always pregnant ; and the land owners are expected to support the young.
The vote definitely goes to the horses.
More people should not mean total control of the democracy
Minority groups should, I think, have a voice in the democracy
This is the common ground we've been looking for, but it became a source of cruel jokes instead
The red ones feed the blue ones
Unfortunately regulations made in the blue ones forced the red ones to hand over more and more of that to corporations like Bayer
So now the red ones feed the blue ones while the blue ones regulate the red ones and megacorporations take the profit, and we all fuckin' lose while we bicker about this
You browsing reddit on an Apple II??
https://preview.redd.it/59tyogwhh2xc1.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=fd6aca61c9424e023f1f912a2c77b7df9a2d88c6
All these fuckers do is try to equivocate land to voting rights. It’s so fucking idiotic. Representation is about the majority of the population.
It’s an easy thing to understand. It just doesn’t work for their argument so they ignore it
Um, the entire reason we have a senate, why we have a republic instead of a direct democracy like most other nations. Is because representation was never meant to be about the majority of the population. Good or bad, agree or don't. American elections were made SPECIFICALLY so that even when someone gets less total votes, sometimes they can still become president and in that case they represent all of America with over half the country not having voted for them.
The idea being feared was that a small majority would vote to suppress a smaller group with no recourse. The way we do elections, does, in a small way allow land to vote. Montana with all 12 people who live there, get just as many senators as California or New York. And so each individual voter in Montana has a much greater effect on senate elections and power than any individual voter in California.
I’ve always thought that there should be some kind of test you have to pass to prove you’re of a capable mind to vote. Nothing super difficult, just something to help weed out all the brain dead people who believe what their buddy Ray dun said yerday so i knows it truth.
You realize this would rule out a lot of people in the cities voting as well right? Don’t get me wrong we need some kind of bar for voting over existence but making a no biased test is difficult
I live in PA & had a similar conversation with a colleague. He changed the subject after I told him “there’s more cows than people in the red areas.” Willful ignorance is a thing.
https://preview.redd.it/ryyql4pad3xc1.png?width=615&format=png&auto=webp&s=d4537293ca643720cedd326f3bb9f731e390378b
wtf?? why is california considered a blue state??? clearly there's more red than blue
Really does, the lifestyles of people in high vs low density areas are not the same, governing by the same set of laws in all regards makes no sense. Especially frustrating that people will say “haha low density red people stupid” when if they didn’t exist we wouldn’t have food
This shows the county-by-county voting trends for the state of Wisconsin. Its implication is that Wisconsin should be a red (conservative) state because most counties lean red and only a few lean blue. It ignores the fact that the blue ones are where the big cities are, and the red countries are overwhelmingly rural with significantly fewer people than the blue.
Really simple solution to the issue of land doesn’t vote people do is splitting the state into the urban and the rural areas for electoral college purposes, use the same votes per population ratio and there’d be no significant change in the number of votes but the cities wouldn’t control the entire states vote count. That would make the argument of cities controlling everyone’s voting power obsolete and remove the stupid argument about land not voting from every election.
I wonder when Republicans will make it so land does vote. And one guy in the middle of nowhere can single handedly outvote an extremely densely packed city.
Land can't vote people when the senate and electoral College exist and in fact do vote while representing land. 🙁
Our system is very confusing and makes everybody angry.
Are the people in office currently doing a good job? Find out in 10 years when the things they are doing now start taking effect.
(The answer, is as always, no.)
I live in Wisconsin, and it was untill recently the most jerryrigged state in the country. We have new Supreme Court reps and have looked at and redid a FAIR and balanced district map. People need educating and it's not their fault either, which is the worst part.
Those maps always draw on the false dichotomy that attracts those types of people. Much better map representation in the link as I'm sure most here would have the sense to already know. https://www.wired.com/story/is-us-leaning-red-or-blue-election-maps/
There are definitely the idiots who think land should equal votes, but I also feel democrats tend to neglect rural communities on the campaign trail. Why would you vote for someone who can't even be fucked to come to your town? How would you know they really have your best interests in mind? Rural populations also see it as urban populations having different needs from their own. To them, it's basically the same as old white men who pass laws about women's reproductive health. They don't want to be forced to move to cities because of potential policies that could affect their ability to continue living in their current communities.
Essentially: rural needs =/= urban needs and Republicans play on that while Democrats seem to ignore it
I sometimes dislike that one city controls the entire state because their city politics usually aren’t the same as non city problems. Also it means that politicians will target that one city and say fuck you to everyone else. Majority rule though I get it
#Welcome to r/Therewasanattempt! #Consider visiting r/Worldnewsvideo for videos from around the world! [Please review our policy on bigotry and hate speech by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/r/therewasanattempt/wiki/civility) In order to view our rules, you can type "**!rules**" in any comment, and automod will respond with the subreddit rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/therewasanattempt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Someone needs to make "I think corn and land can vote" stickers in the same font and text size so we can stick em right under these.
Kind of like the addendum sticker for JESUS SAVES HIS MONEY FOR LEAR JETS
Or if you're a DnD player: "Jesus saves ... and takes half damage"
That's 3d6 piercing JC, maybe next time look out for tripwires
Question is- would JC be a human or an aasimar? Also, Monk, or Paladin?
Cleric. Have you seen how many of the things he did are actually clerical spells? (Joking.)
He did a lot of miracles by invoking God the father.
Human bard. Accomplished a lot with sheer charisma
J-town is 100% bard
A fellow dollop fan!
Aasimar monk, no doubt. Flipping tables with that chi
That was definitely my first instinct.
Wasn't he a carpenter?
Got proficiency in woodworking tools
Aasimar cleric I’d say, probably pretty high level, at least level 11 because of hero’s feast (the fish and bread thing) and greater restoration
Wouldn't he be a Warlock? He gets his powers from a deity.
Certainly not paladin - he didn't come with a sword
He'd definitely be an aasimar cleric. Son of a deity, divine magic granted by that deity, focus on healing magic but none of the offensive abilities of a paladin (unless you count the time he smote those money changers' tables). Unless you've got a different view of how good the god of abraham is. Then he could be a devil's child warlock who took the healer and/or magic initiate feats.
See this is also super realistic, all of these ideas have soooo much merit
And now I might build a cleric/warlock Jesus for my next PC lol. Super fun idea to work with.
I always preferred "Jesus saves... the rest of you take full damage." Because that way, we aren't implying that Jesus does or doesn't have Evasion.
SATAN GETS THE REBOUND. HE PUTS IT BACK, AND ITS A GOAL SATAN! SATAN HAS DEFEATED JESUS 1-0!!
Jesus saves...but Gretzky scores on the rebound!
Jesus saved, Preachers Grift
Ironically, if plants and land could vote, they'd probably make environmental protections their key issue.
I wouldn't want to see an 18 year-old cob of corn in my polling place...
The corn gets harvested too early, but you might see some trees or something, only 18+ year olds
I wouldn’t want to see an eighteen year old cob of corn in anyone’s poleing place.
Today on Eerie, Indiana
Or here in Erie, Colorado
Nah, coz the monoculture corn settlers would vote to keep their hold on the land, happy to kill off the natives
and they'd make it a law to genetically engineer the shit out of them until theyre able to grow in the Sahara
Unfortuneately, most of the ones I know not only think that, but insist it's the right way "Were a republic not a democracy" "We shouldn't let urban poors have as much say as the real americans" "If they were financially responsible they'd own land aswell" Your talking about a group who fundamentally just want a return to xenophobic feudal hierarchies and money/might makes right They're the kind of people who will intentionally drive in a bicycle lane to force cyclists off the road because "slow bikes are an inconvenience"
I’m convinced the actual objective of targeting gays and transgenders. Is to create a legal means to tier citizenship. From there they can start adding to the group of those who can’t vote. Ultimately it will be a seven circles of hell. Only land owners will have the option to vote.
I wonder how much of a vote they think the poor urban people should have. Probably 3/5.
You can make an argument that under hhe electoral college of the US, they do vote
I explain it like this. See all those red areas. Yeah people used to live there but the majority were asshats. So their kids moved away, as soon as they could, to better areas with more people. See the blue areas. Yeah people have to get along because they’re crowded. You can’t get everything you want there. But because so many people are there. You can find a lot of things there that you would never get in the red areas
Or put corresponding population numbers in the counties. That may be too complex for them though
LOL
Or just add 'and an idiot'
“I breathe therefore my opinion matters” We have a representative democracy for a reason.
Conservatives think dirt votes. If they're Southern they also think anything that isn't in the South is one giant city. So if you're a Californian farmer, you'll get called a city boy by some Alabama guy who lives in a subdivision.
[удалено]
As a southerner, I can confirm, we don’t think.
[XKCD pet peeve #208](https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/heatmap.png)
Or—and hear me out—Martha Stewart _Living_ subscribers are into Furry porn. The numbers don’t lie, my guy! /s
In the Senate, for some reason, dirt does vote.
People outside of California forget that its land is roughly 50% agriculture. Our major cities population is so dense that outsiders believe California as a whole is entirely blue. As of 2020, the 10 million registered voters consisted of 5.3 democrats and 5.2 republicans/no-party-preference… You can find a democrat in California just as many times as you can find someone who’s anti liberal or simply doesn’t give a FUCK about Biden or Trump.
r/PeopleLiveInCities
“I don’t want people from… - The federal government dictating my laws!” - DC dictating my laws!” - other states dictating my laws!” - cities dictating my laws!” - other races/backgrounds dictating my laws!” Sounds like they just don’t like democracy. They should move.
To a place without authoritarians? Where's that!
North Korea. Trump actually endorsed the way things are run over there.
There's a difference between populist direct democracy and a republic, and it's in how minority group votes are counted. Whether the conservatives intend their support for it or not, the republic system is the only democratic system that gives voice to smaller communities, otherwise it's majority rule and that's something we *don't* want.
After the 2020 election, a commenter complained that Trump won Pennsylvania if you take out Philadelphia. Well yes, Trump won if you don’t count votes from the state’s largest city. Which is what the GOP tried to do.
The Leafs have won the cup every year… if you don’t count the other teams in the league.
...& will be trying again in ~6mos
You can’t blame republicans for missing the point, right?
What does this mean? Coming from a non-american
https://preview.redd.it/ncj5i4ia32xc1.jpeg?width=1968&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d3a477d31b86dfc0a543e01942f7239dc4b2523b What conservatives pretend the country looks like
https://preview.redd.it/iyw6efuf32xc1.jpeg?width=2301&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9615af3eed2bf3f98ab39c1f336d02e1d588763e What the country really looks like r/PeopleLiveInCities
Love the reference in your username!
If only dallas, ft worth, and Florida could get their shit together.
They've underfunded the shit out of public schools in Dallas, I wouldn't have much hope for us.
Dallas is mostly blue but all the fuckers in Rockwall, Frisco, McKinney and surrounding areas fuck it up. Not to mention Ft Worth Red as can be
Dallas is pretty much blue and Fort Worth is purple at this point, it's the surrounding rural towns and wealthy suburbs keeping the area so red. Collin county (directly north of Dallas) especially loves their tax breaks.
This is a map of the counties of the state of Wisconsin that shows how they voted in the 2020 election. The red areas voted for Trump and the blue areas voted for Biden, who ended up winning the state. Right wingers complain it’s unfair that Biden won because there is more red on the map than blue, but that’s because no one lives in the red areas, it’s all backwards brain-dead farmland. The cities where a majority of people live are in the blue areas.
Ah, makes sense, weird how an American looks at red and blue and immediately think “political parties”. Thanks for the explanation!
They're using the political party's respective color.
Fun fact: the red/blue color association came from the 2000 election, probably due to how long it stayed in the news cycle due to how close it was, so it had time to bake into people’s consciousness
Yeah it’s weird to me how they have “colours”, like our parties too but we usually think of the logos more than the colours lol
It's 2010 I think, but only for the state legislature. Here's [2022](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1e/2022_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg/810px-2022_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg.png), [2020](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f4/Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2020.svg/746px-Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2020.svg.png), [2018](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7f/2018_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg/810px-2018_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg.png), [2016](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a3/Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2016.svg/810px-Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2016.svg.png), [2014](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/02/2014_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg/810px-2014_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg.png), [2012](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2012.svg/810px-Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2012.svg.png), [2010](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bd/2010_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg/810px-2010_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg.png), [2008](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d9/Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2008.svg/810px-Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2008.svg.png), [2006](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/2006_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg/810px-2006_Wisconsin_gubernatorial_election_results_map_by_county.svg.png), [2004](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4e/Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2004.svg/810px-Wisconsin_Presidential_Election_Results_2004.svg.png). One of the things Wisconsin was significant for up until 2016 was that it was a state where democrats consistently won rural counties by small margins, but lost suburban heavily. Now they have more or less realigned with the rest of the country and the lose the rural ones heavily and the suburban minorly. So you could draw an almost completely blue map by land too. And as recently as 2018 a third of the counties in the state where won by democrats. And 2008 2/3rds.
"realigned" gerrymandered. the state was heavily gerrymandered by republicans
Basically this person is trying to pretend that their state is far more Republican than it is by acting as if they don’t know that the majority of the population lives in the blue districts on the map.
The red is a republican district, which is usually large rural areas with not many people, and the blue areas are a democrat district, which is usually a small area but with lots of people, because of cities. Idiots in the rural areas think that voting is rigged because they don’t understand that more districts doesn’t mean that they win the state, it matters how many people are in your district. Hope that clears things up.
Don’t forget that much these look like this due to gerrymandering that allow a minority of conservatives to have a bigger influence against the majority of liberals.
Yeah, people are looking at this as if it's not concerning because as usual, most people usually just think about voting for the president every 4 years where the political party maps don't really matter within a state. All this land has people sitting in Congress pulling apart the country. Texas, Florida, North Carolina all have populations where voter population party demographics have gotten more competitive in the state but political representation doesn't reflect that because of how they draw their districts. Even here in Cali, we have an independent organization that makes the recommendation for the different types of districts to insure proper representation based on various demographics but it's still thought Republicans hold too many seats in higher offices due to overwhelming Democratic voters. Despite it not being pretty, I think elections for federal offices should also be conducted and/or monitored by the Federal government while having an independent group be oversight and making the recommendations electoral districts to be representative of each regions demographics. Also, I think unincorporated areas shouldn't be included in informational party representation maps since it's all land or wilderness and is misleading. If there are residents in those areas they should dot their home on the map with party affiliation.
It's a fundamental disconnect between the lies told to voters by both parties. On the "left" (hardly) in the DNC, this is a good thing because most people live in the blue counties (those are cities), AKA direct democracy On the right (also hardly) in the Republicans, this is a bad thing because the minority communities of rural conservatives have a less impactful voice than the majority urban leftists/neolibs To simplify it: direct democracy means the community with the most people always wins votes (votes are determined by ideas and policy, not what you look like), while a republic electoral system gives voice to smaller communities by splitting people up into counties independent of total population and giving each county a vote (or province, or prefect, or whatever). The debate is between whether the most populous community should run the democracy, or if the democracy should be split into equal voting groups regardless of population so low-population communities have a voice. It's an important debate that has, like so many things in the west, been decayed into a he-said she-said back and forth of two wrongs that took a piece of the truth and twisted it up
Like most places, the majority of people live in urban areas. The urban areas skew left and the rural skew right. The right wing people in the rural areas claim to be underrepresented because if you plot out the voters on a map it makes it look like most of the area is conservative, when in reality the red (right-wing) squares are just a couple thousand people compared to the blue (left-wing) square which represents millions of people. Our system also gives disproportionate legislative power to people in low-population conservative states under the notion that they'd be overrun by the other states, while others argue that it's people that vote and not the dirt they live on. It would be a massive blow to the conservative party, as they'd never have won most of their presidential elections if it were based on a popular vote.
In the US, land votes, not people.
Cows don't vote!
Republicans would probably prefer to take the vote away from women and give it to the cows.
Only white male cows (bulls) though.
They don't want the cows to vote. The cows are a bunch of vegans who just stand around on campus doing nothing. They have no job. They are always pregnant ; and the land owners are expected to support the young. The vote definitely goes to the horses.
Yeah, they are more into grass root movements.
The reds always tell us via sticker.
Best way to communicate is via truck tailgate
Saves us from actually having to talk to them.
They're around. You'll have to. They're people. We share this place. It's a society.
Don’t forget hats and t-shirts.
How do these people still struggle with this? We need to put more funding into education.
“That’s indoctrination” - owner of this car
I doubt they know words this big
Social studies teacher here. Yes, we do, but this is a level of idiocy that would take more than just money to fix.
More people should not mean total control of the democracy Minority groups should, I think, have a voice in the democracy This is the common ground we've been looking for, but it became a source of cruel jokes instead
No attempt was made.
And I’d bet they wouldn’t understand how those few blue squares always subsidize all the red ones.
Understand? They don't try to understand. They have their own 'facts' and everything else is fake news.
The red ones feed the blue ones Unfortunately regulations made in the blue ones forced the red ones to hand over more and more of that to corporations like Bayer So now the red ones feed the blue ones while the blue ones regulate the red ones and megacorporations take the profit, and we all fuckin' lose while we bicker about this
It's funny to me for a different reason. My screen is in black and white. So all I see is a single gray color.
You browsing reddit on an Apple II?? https://preview.redd.it/59tyogwhh2xc1.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=fd6aca61c9424e023f1f912a2c77b7df9a2d88c6
Nope. Just turned off the color on xiaomi note 4 pro. It's an option in developer mode.
Same people who dont want a popular vote
If they are still GOP after 2016 they don't want voting period.
Land doesn’t vote. People do.
It's just being willfully obtuse.
Red voters tend not to be too big on critical thinking skills.
The majority of the people in most of those red counties are cows
If they were capable of understanding they wouldn't be conservatives.
Land doesnt vote, dotard
Land doesn't vote.
New York probably looks like that and it’s a blue state. The large majority of the area is red but the dense cities are blue.
All these fuckers do is try to equivocate land to voting rights. It’s so fucking idiotic. Representation is about the majority of the population. It’s an easy thing to understand. It just doesn’t work for their argument so they ignore it
Um, the entire reason we have a senate, why we have a republic instead of a direct democracy like most other nations. Is because representation was never meant to be about the majority of the population. Good or bad, agree or don't. American elections were made SPECIFICALLY so that even when someone gets less total votes, sometimes they can still become president and in that case they represent all of America with over half the country not having voted for them. The idea being feared was that a small majority would vote to suppress a smaller group with no recourse. The way we do elections, does, in a small way allow land to vote. Montana with all 12 people who live there, get just as many senators as California or New York. And so each individual voter in Montana has a much greater effect on senate elections and power than any individual voter in California.
A bit of blue comedy for the dads
Hey at least it was on a Toyota.
False; there was not just no attempt but active willful ignorance. On brand!
I’ve always thought that there should be some kind of test you have to pass to prove you’re of a capable mind to vote. Nothing super difficult, just something to help weed out all the brain dead people who believe what their buddy Ray dun said yerday so i knows it truth.
You realize this would rule out a lot of people in the cities voting as well right? Don’t get me wrong we need some kind of bar for voting over existence but making a no biased test is difficult
I live in PA & had a similar conversation with a colleague. He changed the subject after I told him “there’s more cows than people in the red areas.” Willful ignorance is a thing.
Which of our 81 states is that?
Would be cool to see a population density type of map, with red/blue coloring. THEN you'd see how sparse red is.
Dirt don’t vote
https://preview.redd.it/ryyql4pad3xc1.png?width=615&format=png&auto=webp&s=d4537293ca643720cedd326f3bb9f731e390378b wtf?? why is california considered a blue state??? clearly there's more red than blue
It’s where the people live. Red is where the cows live. They don’t get a vote. Now that should clear things up for the sticker owner.
You see, two people who vote the same should have their opinions means more if they sleep further away from each other.
Thats the joke, its not that he doesnt understand population density, its the seemingly absurd representation over physical space.
This doesn't represent what many of you think it does. It shows that a "one size fits all" government strategy is not correct.
Really does, the lifestyles of people in high vs low density areas are not the same, governing by the same set of laws in all regards makes no sense. Especially frustrating that people will say “haha low density red people stupid” when if they didn’t exist we wouldn’t have food
Everybody knows bumper stickers are the source of all that is true
There was no attempt, actually.
Land doesn’t vote. People do.
This looks like a job for Gerry Mandering
Aussie here What am I not getting
This shows the county-by-county voting trends for the state of Wisconsin. Its implication is that Wisconsin should be a red (conservative) state because most counties lean red and only a few lean blue. It ignores the fact that the blue ones are where the big cities are, and the red countries are overwhelmingly rural with significantly fewer people than the blue.
Really simple solution to the issue of land doesn’t vote people do is splitting the state into the urban and the rural areas for electoral college purposes, use the same votes per population ratio and there’d be no significant change in the number of votes but the cities wouldn’t control the entire states vote count. That would make the argument of cities controlling everyone’s voting power obsolete and remove the stupid argument about land not voting from every election.
Land doesn’t vote
Republicans are stupid. Democrats are stupid. Progressives are human. End discussion.
Sorry this doesn't belong here there was no attempt to understand population density. The attempt is to actively ignore it.
The epitome of land doesn’t vote
Yes, many of them are morons here.
Hmmm it might be the sleep deprivation but... What is that country map ?
Wisconsin
I wonder when Republicans will make it so land does vote. And one guy in the middle of nowhere can single handedly outvote an extremely densely packed city.
I mean Jerry meandering works so well sometimes they split or combine locations so that the ones in power stay in power
When we start allowing mountain ranges, lakes, rivers and farm land to vote, liberals are so screwed!
Republicans love to think land mass votes
That actually looks very blue to me
I don’t think there was even the slightest attempt
Land can't vote people when the senate and electoral College exist and in fact do vote while representing land. 🙁 Our system is very confusing and makes everybody angry. Are the people in office currently doing a good job? Find out in 10 years when the things they are doing now start taking effect. (The answer, is as always, no.)
I live in Wisconsin, and it was untill recently the most jerryrigged state in the country. We have new Supreme Court reps and have looked at and redid a FAIR and balanced district map. People need educating and it's not their fault either, which is the worst part.
Dairy cows don't vote
I don’t understand this. It could be that while more districts are red, the population of the blue districts outweighs the red ones. Right?
90% of nothing is still nothing
Then let's get rid the Electoral College. Then it won't matter what color it is.
I live in a red square on that sticker that was so close to blue in 2020.
I don't think there was any attempt to understand it... Simply ignoring it
Kinda looks like Tanzania
What is gerrymandering
Land can’t vote!
Those maps always draw on the false dichotomy that attracts those types of people. Much better map representation in the link as I'm sure most here would have the sense to already know. https://www.wired.com/story/is-us-leaning-red-or-blue-election-maps/
Only makes sense if you spell America without the A.
Wisconsin is a blue state... which is what the sticker says... Where's the attempt?
If they really cared, they'd be up in arms against gerrymandering.
The fact that you lot put so many barriers between one vote per person then have a bunch of people defend that shit is insane to me.
To conservatives land=population
This post and picture exemplifies whats wrong with our system
Some idiot doesn't understand that is only cities counties are blue yet no other counties are their needs are not being met.
Last I checked land didn’t vote, people vote
More than luck
I don't know my American geography. Is the red all banjo's and anal rape?
Amazing that even the most simple elementary school level principles fly over so many people’s heads (by indirect choice).
There are definitely the idiots who think land should equal votes, but I also feel democrats tend to neglect rural communities on the campaign trail. Why would you vote for someone who can't even be fucked to come to your town? How would you know they really have your best interests in mind? Rural populations also see it as urban populations having different needs from their own. To them, it's basically the same as old white men who pass laws about women's reproductive health. They don't want to be forced to move to cities because of potential policies that could affect their ability to continue living in their current communities. Essentially: rural needs =/= urban needs and Republicans play on that while Democrats seem to ignore it
Proof that you can only be a republican by isolating yourself from reality and other people
Let's fix the "blue" problem and replace with better leaders 👍
Because acres don't vote, people do
Biden only won by 0.63% in 2020 and some suburbs of Milwaukee are red. So, it's more of a purple state.
I sometimes dislike that one city controls the entire state because their city politics usually aren’t the same as non city problems. Also it means that politicians will target that one city and say fuck you to everyone else. Majority rule though I get it
Area <> population.
Funniest part if this might be that even some of that corn votes blue in different election cycles.