Quote:
Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
We all pretend its all so simple... but here's some thing I don't think are easly explained.
Bush was about equal to gore. If you add in Texas knowing a vote didn't matter and the Fla. panhandle, it was a wash.
But bush won at least a dozen states by an enormous amount (70%). That should mean if total vote is close, Bush should have lost the electoral, right? why not?
|
Perhaps I do not understand math, and I sense a trap, but I would postulate that the dozen or so states to which you refer are largely Western states, largely with voting populations a tiny fraction of the populations of states such as New York, California (of course), Florida, or even Texas. Thus, the 70-30 split in Wyoming, et al. means relatively little to the popular vote total, as compared to the (still few) electoral votes it sent Bush's way. Florida was a tie. The smaller % margins for Gore in NY and California, e.g. add up to many more votes than the bigger margins in the smaller states.
After all, the numbers must add up, because they do.
S_A_M
