boxofdelights: (Default)
[personal profile] boxofdelights
In Allow Me To Retort: A Black Guy's Guide to the Constitution, Elie Mystal quotes Cardozo School of Law professor Kyron Huigens:
The reason the popular vote diverges from the Electoral College vote is that each voter in Wyoming has more voting power in the Senate—and so in the Electoral College—than each voter in California.
Here is the proper calculation…. If Carol [resident of California] has one vote in the Senate, how many does Will [resident of Wyoming] have?
Fifty-seven.

Kyron Huigens, "The Electoral College Is Actually Worse Than You Think—Here's Why," Observer, February 27, 2019.

Wyoming has 584,309 inhabitants, two senators, and three electoral college votes. Mystal suggests that buying 500,000 Black people a townhouse in Wyoming would be a more effective way for some billionaire to defend democracy than a futile Presidential run. And it doesn't have to be 500,000: 278,503 people turned out to vote in Wyoming in 2020. And some of them voted for Democrats! 120,069 more Democratic votes would have sent Wyoming's electoral votes to Biden/Harris, and elected Lynnette Grey Bull instead of Lynne Cheney. In 2018, 74984 more votes could have elected a Democratic senator from Wyoming.

The Inflation Reduction Act will invest $369 billion in "energy security and climate change". Can we send some of that money to Wyoming? People who work in clean energy and climate change tend to vote Democratic. Also, creating a lot of high-paying jobs will make the whole community more prosperous.

I'm looking at the Californication of Colorado here, that turned Colorado blue, and thinking that Wyoming is the logical next step for Californians who are being evicted by climate change. If there were jobs in Wyoming, I bet they'd go there. What do you think?

Date: 2022-11-02 10:22 am (UTC)
lunabee34: (Default)
From: [personal profile] lunabee34
Thanks for linking to this!

Date: 2022-11-06 11:24 am (UTC)
lunabee34: (Default)
From: [personal profile] lunabee34
Oh wow. That's so frustrating because it's not what is commonly taught about the need for militia at all, but it makes terrible, terrible sense.

Date: 2022-11-08 11:13 am (UTC)
lunabee34: (Default)
From: [personal profile] lunabee34
Nods nods

Date: 2022-11-02 12:03 pm (UTC)
loligo: Scully with blue glasses (Default)
From: [personal profile] loligo
I fantasize about this scenario on a regular basis.

Date: 2022-11-02 06:58 pm (UTC)
silveradept: A kodama with a trombone. The trombone is playing music, even though it is held in a rest position (Default)
From: [personal profile] silveradept
That certainly seems like the way to go - put incentives to lure Democratic voters to those states where there's more power per person and then let them do things that will bring infrastructure and jobs to the area, along with energy resilience and cheaper power, potentially.

You just have to get the first set of people to go there and stick it out until everyone else does as well.

Date: 2022-11-02 07:46 pm (UTC)
silveradept: A kodama with a trombone. The trombone is playing music, even though it is held in a rest position (Default)
From: [personal profile] silveradept
They absolutely would follow. To get the first batch out there, the lure would be high wages, great infrastructure, and low cost of living until everyone else came following after. The billionaires would want to adopt a town and pour their money into improving all the utility systems and the Internet access until it was suitable, and then get people to move there with the promises of adorable housing and good utilities, and then do the same thing with the next town over, until you had that critical mass of people who would follow on. (And, likely, gentrify, because of course that will happen.)

Profile

boxofdelights: (Default)
boxofdelights

June 2025

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
222324252627 28
2930     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Aug. 3rd, 2025 03:25 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios