Because of the electoral college. It didn’t matter who didn’t vote. If 0% more people voted in Mississippi or Alabama and every single eligible voter voted in New York and California, it wouldn’t have mattered.

▲

daveguy 19 hours ago | parent [-]

That's some bullshit. If everyone voted the electoral college would be dwarfed across the board. If 50% more people vote the difference won't be in just AL, MS, CA, NY -- it will be across the board. Stop trying to fuck with our elections by discouraging people from voting.

▲

raw_anon_1111 19 hours ago | parent [-]

Really? Do you not know how the electoral college works? What do you think happens if there was 30% more participation in Blue states?

▲

daveguy 18 hours ago | parent [-]

If 30% more people vote it won't just be people in "blue states". That's the goddamn point. It'll mean we, as a country, get closer to the things we have 60%+ agreement.

You're discouraging voting with failures of logic, Mr 4 Month Raw Anon. "BuT wHaT iF tHeY OnLy vOtE iN bLuE sTaTeS?!" Seriously? ffs, a child could see through you.

To everyone else -- remember this. Vote in numbers that can't be eclipsed by nihilist propaganda asshats like this tool.

Let's make the margins huge in blue and purple states, miniscule to none in red states. The US can show the world a massive rejection of Trumpism if we all vote.

	▲	raw_anon_1111 18 hours ago \| parent [-]
		If 30% more voted in Alabama , Mississippi, Texas or Florida, do you think they would have voted democratic? Do you have any evidence that the demographics of people who don’t vote are disproportionate to the people who do in any of those states? If you know anything about American history, despite what Michelle Obama says “this is exactly who this country is”