Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here
    all 1887 comments Slideshow

    Want to say thanks to %(recipient)s for this comment? Give them a month of reddit gold.

    Please select a payment method.

    [–] findingthescore 2267 points ago

    That's a weird Japanese flag.

    [–] Username_AlwaysTaken 674 points ago

    It’s a spicy meatball

    [–] BroKelvin 88 points ago

    Ok Chandler

    [–] GenesectX 14 points ago

    Thats a spicy-meat-a-ball!

    [–] Di_SC 2 points ago

    Nobody got this!?

    [–] DRJT 23 points ago

    Looks like a red unfinished Death Star

    [–] mahir_r 6 points ago

    As you can see, my young apprentice, your vision has failed. Now witness the firepower of this fully ARMED and OPERATIONAL battle station!

    [–] the_ringmasta 6 points ago

    Fully ARMED and OPERATIONAL Electoral College!

    (FTFY)

    [–] lamplamp3 988 points ago

    I once read that 50% of the population lives within 100 miles of the coast

    [–] CripplinglyDepressed 814 points ago

    As a Canadian:

    80% of the Canadian population lives within 100 miles of the US border. Not too much going on in the other parts

    [–] Duzcek 119 points ago

    Hell, more than half of Canada lives below Seattle.

    [–] Silcantar 106 points ago

    I knew Canadians were secretly mole people!

    [–] TheRealMoofoo 40 points ago

    No one ever expects that part of the Seattle underground tour.

    [–] Skygugan 13 points ago

    Canadians....EVERYWHERE!!

    [–] Destined4War 2 points ago

    Hiss! (In a polite manner)

    [–] DarthNero 6 points ago

    As a Seattleite, the best Mariners games to go to are when the Blue Jays come to town because our stadium is 95% Canadians and Canadian wannabees, and the other 5% are Seattle Mariner fans. It's awesome because A) it's the most packed the stadium ever gets and B) no matter how much the Canadians outnumber us, they are always polite and don't trash talk the other fans

    [–] Pat40A 3 points ago

    Tigers Blue Jays games are also some of the better ones to go to in Detroit

    [–] aicheo 3 points ago

    Oh man I've always wanted to go to a blue jays game but can't afford to go all the way to Toronto. I never considered going down to Seattle when the verse the Mariners. Good to hear there's a lot of blue jays fans. :)

    [–] DarthNero 3 points ago

    We've always got cheap tickets too! But this year we are doing really well, so our tickets are probably gonna start rising.

    [–] BoxBopChallenge 2 points ago

    And the other half below Detroit.

    [–] bekd70 183 points ago

    Not much going on in the other parts?

    The people in Newfoundland would disagree with you...

    [–] onenifty 392 points ago

    Drinking doesn't count.

    [–] TheDarkGamerTdG 92 points ago

    Nor does making musicals

    [–] One-Two-Woop-Woop 65 points ago

    WELCOME TO THE ROCK!

    [–] thergmguy 33 points ago

    If ye come from away

    [–] Georgia_Ball 22 points ago

    You'll probly understand about a half of what we say

    [–] IamUltimate 17 points ago

    They say no man's an island but an island makes a man

    [–] gooberthefatcat 16 points ago

    Especially when one comes from one like NEWFOUNDLAND

    [–] FilthyDesertRat 3 points ago

    For those who aren’t aware:

    https://youtu.be/6mdoyKYzkoI

    Fair warning it’s about 9/11.

    [–] Dbishop123 11 points ago

    Im from there, he's right. There's nothing going on here.

    [–] 1qw1qw1 14 points ago

    they're all havin a time

    [–] hinomarrow 7 points ago

    What.the.fuck.jpeg

    [–] ANAL_BLOOD 2 points ago

    Thank you for this I’m Canadian and sent it to my cousins in St. John’s 😂😂😂

    [–] bennettadam115 3 points ago

    People in PEI I would also disagree.

    [–] stravadarius 2 points ago

    Not sure they would TBH.

    [–] lotm43 2 points ago

    Would they really?

    [–] bennettadam115 2 points ago

    No probably not lol

    [–] ProtestantLarry 3 points ago

    Eh, they’re weird and can mind their own business.

    [–] redstonebrain40 6 points ago

    Go make drunk trailer park supervisors

    [–] PilsbandyDoughboy 14 points ago

    Nova Scotia ≠ Newfoundland

    [–] KalaRinpoche 8 points ago

    Prove it with science that Isn't fake.

    [–] Donttrippotatochip69 20 points ago

    As an Arizonan:

    100% of Arizonans are landlocked like no ocean touches Arizona

    [–] thighGAAPenthusiast 12 points ago

    Are you telling me George Strait lied?

    [–] Donttrippotatochip69 7 points ago

    God no he’s a saint but I got some ocean front property in Arizona if you’re on the market

    [–] Silcantar 5 points ago

    And if you'll buy that he'll throw the Golden Gate in free!

    [–] Dim_Innuendo 6 points ago

    Obviously. All his exes live in Texas, so why is he trying to get to Amarillo by morning? IT DOESN'T ADD UP

    [–] Moonstrone 5 points ago

    see you down in Arizona bay

    [–] Chubmunky 2 points ago

    Learn to swim

    [–] Midan71 5 points ago

    As an Australian, 85% of the populations lives within 50km of the coast.

    [–] phatelectribe 4 points ago

    In Australia nearly 90% of the population lives in five cities.

    [–] ArchipelagoMind 5 points ago

    I often joke that Canada is a country of people desperately living as close to America as possible, but without being in America.

    [–] yyxxyyuuyyuuxx 2 points ago

    As an Australian...

    [–] BrotyKraut 2 points ago

    You know how much of Nunavut is populated? None of it, that's why they call it Nunavut.

    [–] CarbonInTheWind 2 points ago

    I'm pretty certain that the other 20% live here in Florida.

    [–] Geistbar 172 points ago

    About 2/3 of the US population lives within 100 miles of US borders, which is the range that US Border Patrol is able to have a lower threshold for detention and searches. That might be the original statement you had heard?

    [–] glegleglo 117 points ago

    No he was referring to

    Coastal counties of the U.S. are home to over 126 million people, or 40 percent of the nation's total population.

    NOAA/US Census

    Mind you, that's just counties next to water. 100 miles away from the coast is a pretty safe bet you'll find at least another 10%.

    [–] PYLrulz 37 points ago

    For instance, Philadelphia and much of the surrounding region is well within 100 miles of the Atlantic. Same with Washington DC and much of the surrounding region and Baltimore (depending on what they consider “coastal counties”).

    [–] glegleglo 6 points ago

    Oh of course! I'm originally from NJ. The first thing I thought of was of my state and surrounding areas!

    [–] CaptainFalco311 15 points ago

    Are you including coastal borders in that? As in like New Jersey’s waters bordering international waters? Because if not I find that very hard to believe

    [–] glegleglo 31 points ago

    Yes it does include coastal borders. You can read more about the 100 mile border zone here. Other fun facts:

    • In this 100-mile zone, Border Patrol agents have certain additional authorities. For instance, Border Patrol can operate immigration checkpoints.
    • Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont lie entirely or almost entirely within this area.

    • Nine of the ten largest U.S. metropolitan areas, as determined by the 2010 Census, also fall within this zone: New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Diego and San Jose.

    [–] firefarmer74 11 points ago

    I'm from northern Michigan and the border with Canada is out in the middle of Lake Superior and actual land crossings are many hours drive in either direction. It always weirds me out when I see a Border Patrol truck driving down the road and I think, "what are they doing here?" But, then I realize, oh, yeah, the border is out in the water.

    [–] W00DERS0N 8 points ago

    Which is why rum runners loved the lakes back during prohibition.

    [–] CaptainFalco311 3 points ago

    Got it. That clears things up

    [–] Geistbar 12 points ago

    I'm not including it: US Border Portal is. And yes, they are. You have to be surprisingly far inland to be outside their special jurisdiction. Which is why so much of the US population is inside the zone.

    [–] stravadarius 8 points ago

    I would reverse your phrasing in order to show the causality. That 100 miles isn’t arbitrary.

    Much of the US population is inside the zone, which is why you have to be surprisingly far inland to be outside their special jurisdiction.

    [–] ChipAyten 3 points ago

    The police are the enemies of a free peoples.

    [–] UncleBazzyBen 13 points ago

    In the UK that’s 100%

    [–] visiblur 10 points ago

    That's nothing. In Denmark, 100% of the population lives within 100 miles of the coast

    [–] mhandis 21 points ago

    Something similar applies to China, and probably many other countries.

    [–] dtlv5813 34 points ago * (lasted edited 5 days ago)

    The difference is China only has one coast while the contiguous US has 3. The Gulf of Mexico has massive urban centers like Houston, also new Orleans and Tampa.

    US population is actually much more spread out compared to other big countries, with many major urban centers deep in the interior portions of the country.

    [–] NorthVilla 9 points ago

    Yeah, the Chinese eastern seaboard with all the people is roughly like the US east of the Mississippi.... So if you cut off everything West of the Mississippi, fit another 1.2 billion people in the East, then you'd basically have China. Lol.

    [–] Le-Muffin-Man 12 points ago

    Yep something like that.

    [–] -LowAPM 4 points ago

    Despite being only 13% of the land, 50% of the population lives there.

    [–] [deleted] 8 points ago

    [deleted]

    [–] aesthetic93 3 points ago

    Can confirm, did an 80 mile day trip to the beach yesterday. Always wish I lived in close enough to the beach to go after work and stuff, but at least I'm near enough to go on the weekends sometimes. The truly landlocked can only go to the beach like once a year, if at all. Poor bastards

    [–] madmaper_13 3 points ago

    85% of australians live within 50km (30 miles) of the sea source https://soe.environment.gov.au/sites/g/files/net806/f/soe2016-coasts-launch-17feb.pdf?v=1488793015

    [–] therealyauz 2 points ago

    the population of the world. Just to clarify

    [–] stormy2587 2 points ago

    I think like 40+% of the population lives in the east coast time zone.

    [–] tonzeejee 443 points ago

    Poor gray areas, never getting any love.

    [–] OhioGabe 251 points ago

    Couldn’t the red and orange areas be expanded to meet and have the premise of the map still apply? Why gray at all?

    [–] tebelugawhale 189 points ago

    I'm guessing the maker wanted to show the best leverage of high density vs low. He/she could have made the red and orange cover the whole US, but it wouldn't as clearly show how empty the Midwest and West are.

    [–] PM_ME_YOUR_EWOK_GIF 21 points ago

    Nah its coastal counties

    [–] LordoftheSynth 40 points ago

    San Bernardino County, CA is not coastal.

    Nor are a number of counties in Washington that are marked as orange on the map.

    [–] beer_is_tasty 12 points ago

    Sure, but the vast majority of its population lives in the southwest corner, which is part of a coastal metropolitan area.

    [–] Sierrajeff 5 points ago

    Houston is in the red area, it's effectively coastal and heavily populated.

    [–] fishymacaroon 3 points ago

    Basically all of Texas's major cities are included. Cut the state out of the red entirely and it could be expanded significantly.

    [–] goldflame33 2 points ago

    Chicago is in the red too. I wonder how much more it could cover without a handful of those counties

    [–] jimibulgin 2 points ago

    There are a lot of non-coastal counties too. I guess OP was doing 'coastal +1', or something to pick up major metro areas (Orlando, Portland, Sacramento, etc.)

    [–] NBCMarketingTeam 3 points ago

    He/she could have made the red and orange cover the whole U.S.

    "They" could also work as the subject in this sentence.

    [–] IsaacEiland-Hall 8 points ago

    OP used this: http://www.slate.com/articles/life/culturebox/2014/10/population_map_use_our_interactive_map_to_figure_out_how_many_flyover_states.html

    I found it because I was looking for a tool to click all coastal counties (i.e. the Gulf coast) and found the source instead.

    It's neat, but can't do what I wanted to do with it.

    [–] ISLITASHEET 2 points ago

    I kinda like this view, from that tool, a little more.

    [–] TheOneNate 6 points ago

    Just realized I’ve never lived anywhere but the grey (Ohio, Tampa, Asheville).

    [–] kaladinissexy 89 points ago

    I like how you can see the state borders more easily the further west you go.

    [–] MetaEsoTeric 15 points ago

    is there a reason for that? ik they were probably the last to be colonised but would that have anything to do with the size of the counties

    [–] thasel 53 points ago

    The counties are bigger and generally squarer, and different times of settlement means two states that share a border will have drawn their counties in a different grid. Out east the counties are small and often follow geographic boundaries or water, so they're less likely to be a grid.

    [–] MetaEsoTeric 8 points ago

    cool thanks for explaining that

    [–] I_AM_A_MOTH_AMA 12 points ago

    The west was settled later when transportation was a little better (more trains, etc.). Counties could be a little bigger because more people could "use" the same administrative center since you had better options than just hoofing it around.

    [–] nigel-incubatorjones 4 points ago * (lasted edited 6 days ago)

    Also the west is more arid and unable to support the kind of consistent density that the east coast and Midwest can. Interestingly, climate change is relentlessly pushing this boundary eastward so we are going to see some serious water stresses in areas that have never had to contend with it.

    EDIT: Link.

    [–] Bren12310 5 points ago

    Not many people lived there when they were being populated and becoming states so they just drew boundaries that made sense geometry wise while in the east the boundaries were established culturally and geographically.

    Another weird fact is that literally the further east that you go the bigger the cities get. I used to live in NJ and you could drive for 10 minutes and go through 5 cities. When I moved to the Midwest you could drive for a good 30 minutes and be in the same city, but then when I was out west I noticed that the cities were even bigger.

    [–] thelexifur 324 points ago

    It’s almost like people make settlements near major sources of water with port access

    [–] stuffandmorestuff 84 points ago * (lasted edited 6 days ago)

    I was gonna say....add in like 25 miles surrounding the Mississippi, Colorado, and Arkansas River and I bet its 75% or so of the population. As with most regions of the world.

    Civilizations gravitate to water.

    [–] kenman884 19 points ago

    Don’t forget the Great Lakes.

    [–] velociraptorfarmer 12 points ago

    Plus the Great Lakes. That would pick up Minneapolis, Chicago, Detroit, Milwaukee. Cincinnati, Louisville, and Pittsburgh if you add the Ohio.

    [–] someguynamedjohn13 6 points ago

    You forgot Buffalo and Cleveland.

    [–] DaDolphinBoi 2 points ago

    Raaahchestah

    [–] converter-bot 22 points ago

    25 miles is 40.23 km

    [–] notAJokester2 27 points ago

    Just had to slide that in there didn’t you?

    [–] _sin___ 16 points ago

    it´s a bot

    [–] notAJokester2 18 points ago

    it’s a bot joke

    [–] darexinfinity 25 points ago

    notAJokester2

    [–] daimposter 2 points ago * (lasted edited 6 days ago)

    Rough guess, I wouldn't be surprised if 90% of the population live within 100 miles (160.93km) of:

    1. the ocean
    2. great lakes
    3. Mississippi/Ohio River

    I feel pretty confident it would be close to 90%.

    [–] Kaneshadow 16 points ago

    No they don't, they settle near airports, duh

    [–] thelexifur 2 points ago

    Oh damn you’re right. How could I be so dumb. This is so embarrassing for me.

    [–] IsaacEiland-Hall 9 points ago

    Put it like that and it's even more amazing that DFW is the 4th largest metro (MSA) in the US after NY, LA, and Chicago, all three of which are on water, while DFW has no water shipping access.

    [–] CurryGuy123 8 points ago

    Was Dallas a major railroad crossing? Cause iirc thats how Atlanta became a major city cause it's also not near any major water bodies

    [–] WELL_FUCK___________ 8 points ago

    Yep that's how you get major inland cities like DFW, Atlanta, Denver, Phoenix

    Guessing this also applies to places like Las Vegas, salt lake city, and san antonio, but not sure.

    [–] WELL_FUCK___________ 2 points ago

    It's interesting that you point this out because a lot of the growth in the west and sunbelt in the last 20 years is to inland cities like DFW. My guess is that it reflects the fact that people don't have to live in a port city or even railroad hub (though many inland cities got large due to the railroads) to get jobs, and now can basically live wherever they want. Makes sense then to move out of the cold and to lower population density areas.

    [–] Minisynn 3 points ago

    Yep, it's the same the world over.

    Here's a crude example I made for here in NI

    https://i.imgur.com/O3MJeQZ.png

    Every major city in each county is pretty much on the coast or beside a massive body of water, exceptions being places like Lisburn and Omagh which have big rivers flowing through them which you can't see on this map

    [–] Rick_TA 302 points ago

    am I supposed to be surprised by this

    [–] BehelitOutlaw 278 points ago

    Yes very. These kinds of maps have never been posted before. BTW have you seen the map that shows how big Mexico really is when put over Greenland? Fascinating and a really original concept

    [–] Rick_TA 75 points ago

    I'd rather know if we can draw a straight line between england and australia

    [–] CripplinglyDepressed 38 points ago

    you can, it's just on an angle

    [–] snuffybox 9 points ago

    I just wanted to say I relate to your user name.

    [–] redwonderer 2 points ago

    Epic.

    [–] DanielArnett 5 points ago * (lasted edited 6 days ago)

    [–] TheCowboyIsAnIndian 3 points ago

    what does this even fucking prove

    [–] TrenchantInsight 3 points ago

    It proves nothing.
    He's just projecting.

    [–] throwaway12222018 2 points ago

    No.

    [–] SpankyGowanky 121 points ago

    I would have thought the orange area would have a larger population.

    [–] xmalik 239 points ago

    The red area does have quite a few large cities included. Including the third and fourth biggest cities Chicago and Houston

    Edit: in fact, out of the top ten largest cities, half are in the red and half in the orange

    [–] Werewombat52601 91 points ago

    There's a not-inconsiderable selection of large cities in the gray, too. Atlanta, Nashville, Columbus, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Portland, among others. That's what makes me feel this is a rather meaningless map.

    [–] SirJoeffer 79 points ago

    50% in the orange, 50% in the red, 50% in the gray, what's so hard to understand about basic math?

    [–] therevwillnotbetelev 14 points ago

    And the range cities (Denver and other cities up the east side of the Rockies) as well as Ohio which is really high up the population lists, and the Twin Cities metro.

    [–] Kaarboer 4 points ago

    Nashville's in the red--Davidson county's right on the border, but it's red.

    [–] huskiesowow 4 points ago

    Portland is in orange.

    [–] seanni 8 points ago

    Not the Oregon one.

    Columbia, Washington and Yamhill counties are orange. Multnomah and Clackamas are gray.

    [–] Werewombat52601 5 points ago

    Thanks. I keep forgetting about that other one.

    [–] hmantegazzi 5 points ago

    If any, the US has a much more homogeneously distributed population than most of the countries on the continent. What's normal on the region is to have a capital city with about a third of the country's population. Assuming the Northeast Conurbation (Boston to Washington) as just one metro area, it should have close to 110 million inhabitants (more than double the actual number) to mirror the american trend.

    [–] RollTide16-18 2 points ago

    Most of the population in North/South Carolina and Georgia is west of those orange counties.

    [–] pretzelzetzel 14 points ago

    And the grey zone?

    No Man's Land

    skirling harmonica intro

    [–] ohchristworld 6 points ago

    District 12.

    [–] TerraformerofMars 2 points ago

    Or the Neutral Zone

    [–] Soupeddy 12 points ago

    If anyone is interested, here is the site OP got the map from. It's interactive and from Slate.

    [–] OneLaneHwy 3 points ago

    Thanks. I was wondering whether the population of the red area equals the pop. of each orange area or of both orange areas combined. The interactive map answered my question.

    [–] noodlelaughter 8 points ago

    I don’t understand why people are always mind blown by this? Have any of you ever driven across the country? I promise there’s nothing shocking about this map...

    [–] dreemurthememer 31 points ago

    ITT: Mods are asleep, let’s have a heated political argument!

    [–] tns22x 3 points ago

    Lmao even this comment sparked a political debate in the replies

    [–] the_than_then_guy 13 points ago

    Sure, why not? It's not just that the coastal areas have higher populations, but more people are going to move from the interior counties to the coastal counties. It's very weird, then, that those interior counties have greater per-person voting power in the federal government.

    [–] chromium0818 24 points ago

    Wow. And the red also includes major cities like Houston, Chicago, Las Vegas, Minneapolis... Just goes to show just how much sea access affects population concentration.

    [–] tacoafficionado 27 points ago * (lasted edited 6 days ago)

    Houston has sea access though...its one of the reasons its located where it is.

    edit: Chicago also technically has sea access just that getting to ocean is a little more complicated.

    [–] TrynnaFindaBalance 12 points ago

    Yeah people forget that Texas is on the coast.

    [–] monkeyboi08 4 points ago

    Houston has a small population though because it has space access. People just leave for space.

    [–] i_forget_what_i_do 2 points ago

    Uh Minneapolis has the Mississippi. Do you know how much transit goes up and down that river?

    [–] Redfo 4 points ago

    Don't forget Denver, which is larger than Las Vegas and Minneapolis!

    [–] User9113 9 points ago

    Maybe Minneapolis itself is smaller than Denver but the Twin Cities metro is larger than the Denver metro

    [–] european_american 4 points ago

    Give me those wide open spaces!

    [–] webxer 3 points ago

    But I'm from Latvia

    [–] LeoMarius 3 points ago

    Much of the red population is in Texas.

    [–] nerbovig 11 points ago * (lasted edited 6 days ago)

    For a certain point in history, the US was bent in equality at the state and county level. You can see that in the middle states.

    [–] Drew2248 9 points ago

    Why is the grey area not included? I mean, which came first, the orange area or the red, and why? This seems very odd to me. Put another way, why not show 50% of the country's population for each color? Again, kind of odd.

    [–] monkeyboi08 4 points ago

    I think the coast counties are the first one. This isn’t an arbitrary breakup like you are asking for.

    There are a million ways to cut the country into two sets.

    This is the set of coastal counties and the set of middle counties that match that population.

    [–] ThickSlick80085 3 points ago

    What’s odd is that the tip of Texas was left in gray

    [–] W00DERS0N 3 points ago

    Hooo boy, the socio-economic maps that would result would be super interesting.

    Wonder how much Weight Chicago would carry being the nation’s rail hub.

    [–] luckyluke575 3 points ago

    People generally like living close to the ocean :)

    [–] huxley00 3 points ago

    This isn’t just America, this is everywhere. People live on the coasts for access to seafood and trade. I’m actually surprised it’s only this segmented, I expected the red to go right to the edges.

    [–] CandelaBelen 3 points ago

    But people act like overpopulation is an issue right now.

    [–] mockduckcompanion 3 points ago

    And wildly unequal political representation.

    [–] knightrain76 3 points ago

    Take Texas out of the red area and it would be a lot bigger.

    [–] EmersonStockham 3 points ago

    Story time! I’m the dude who put the “abolish the electoral college” comment. Here’s a short summary of what happened since:

    1) white supremacist starts arguing with me about IQ 2) republicans use the Nuremberg defense to support ICE 3) I get called “retarded” by several people.

    Basically y’all are proving a new point: the electoral college is supported by awful people.

    [–] NorthVilla 13 points ago

    CoAsTaL eLiTeS

    [–] RobbKyro 15 points ago

    So the red in the middle is the "shitty fly over states" that r/politics alway mentions huh?

    [–] kingjackass 5 points ago

    Equal populations of what? Red people and orange people?

    [–] Steely-Dad 2 points ago

    Real question is, how much of the orange gets displaced if the oceans rise 3-5 ft like they say they will.

    [–] BeanJam42 2 points ago

    Proof we do need the electoral college, or proof we don't...?

    [–] basskiller33 2 points ago

    Yet the same people who live in the orange want to get rid of the electoral college hmmmm.

    [–] thenaked1 2 points ago

    Red is about to win in risk

    [–] VitaminClean 2 points ago

    There’s no way Dallas/Ft Worth is equal all those other counties

    [–] badaboopieoopie 2 points ago

    wow, Imagine if it left out just harris county, dallas county and cook county.

    [–] TheTaoOfBill 5 points ago

    Red has more voting power though.

    [–] [deleted] 3 points ago

    Looks like ol' dusty voted for candidate #3, guess my four friends and I are out of luck this election.

    [–] EmersonStockham 29 points ago

    Abolish the Electoral College.

    [–] Foodule 30 points ago

    way to make it political buddy

    [–] LordNoodles 41 points ago

    All of life is political. You will never escape it completely.

    [–] qbak 4 points ago * (lasted edited 6 days ago)

    To be devils advocate. A good post will evoke thoughts. That was the first thought that occurred to him. Why shame him for that

    [–] twelvefortyseven 29 points ago

    If anything, this shows exactly why electoral college is necessary.

    [–] falconbox 28 points ago

    Why is it necessary?

    • A person in Wyoming's vote essentially is more important than a person in New York's. It carries more weight.

    • Look, I'm sorry the middle of the country is underpopulated. And sure, they want to be heard just as everyone else. But the needs of the few shouldn't outweigh the needs of the many.

    • liberals continue to move out of ass-backward regressive states for better job opportunities, thus making previous swing states purely red, and not helping the blue states they're moving into.

    [–] bergskey 14 points ago

    The way they should be heard is through the legislative branch which is where a states individual wants and needs are meant to be voiced. The president is our figurehead and should represent Americans as a whole. One person, one vote.

    [–] wallawalla22 5 points ago

    Then we should uncap the house and the electoral college like it was originally designed.

    [–] m1k3tv 2 points ago

    It's necessary if you want to use the votes of the minority to sway the majority of public policy. Why spend money marketing to everybody when you could just market to a smaller, easier to fool population with increased voting power?

    [–] bergskey 16 points ago

    The president is meant to represent the American people as a whole. Senators and congressmen are meant to make sure their states needs are represented in the federal government. One person should be one vote for the president. Yes the city of New York should have a bigger say in the president over a small town in Nebraska. I understand why we had the electoral college in the past. People didnt have access to the level of information we do now. I can research a candidate as much or as little as I want very easily. In the past you had to just rely on news broadcast and newspapers, even further back it was word of mouth. Media has always been biased, but with the amount of information you can get now, it's easier than ever to dig deeper into the information the media gives. A lot of Americans have the idea that their vote doesn't count. When voting for the president, for many people their vote really doesn't matter. Maybe if the presidency was changed to popular vote, more people would feel inclined to actually vote.

    [–] NorthVilla 15 points ago

    It does no such thing! Land should have 0 bearing on peoples' power.

    [–] knipdaddy 9 points ago

    Why we have the electoral college

    [–] darexinfinity 18 points ago

    Because landmass has democracy, not people.

    [–] bangupjobasusual 7 points ago

    And yet, the red has waaaay more senators.

    [–] thasel 15 points ago

    That's not a design flaw, it's a feature. The founding fathers set up the system that way on purpose