HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Dem. House Candidates Rec...

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 01:34 PM

Dem. House Candidates Received More Votes Than Reps.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/08/house-candidates-votes_n_2096978.html

According to ThinkProgress, 53,952,240 votes were cast for Democratic candidates, while Republican candidates received 53,402,643. However, thanks in part to redistricting, Republicans will hold more than half the seats in the House while receiving less than half of overall votes.


I know that Dem Senators have received far more votes than Repugs. And the population of the States represented by Dem Senators is much larger than that of the Repug Senators.

But this is the first I've seen that even though they have a 40 member edge, the Repugs got fewer votes for the House than Dems.

The have truly been rejected by the populace. But they have gerrymandered their way into more power than this country wants to give them.

21 replies, 1395 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 21 replies Author Time Post
Reply Dem. House Candidates Received More Votes Than Reps. (Original post)
edhopper Nov 2012 OP
southmost Nov 2012 #1
Botany Nov 2012 #2
former9thward Nov 2012 #5
edhopper Nov 2012 #8
dsc Nov 2012 #16
Burma Jones Nov 2012 #3
JEFF9K Nov 2012 #4
99Forever Nov 2012 #6
former9thward Nov 2012 #7
edhopper Nov 2012 #9
former9thward Nov 2012 #12
edhopper Nov 2012 #13
former9thward Nov 2012 #15
edhopper Nov 2012 #18
dsc Nov 2012 #17
James48 Nov 2012 #10
edhopper Nov 2012 #11
former9thward Nov 2012 #14
edhopper Nov 2012 #19
former9thward Nov 2012 #20
justice1 Nov 2012 #21

Response to edhopper (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 01:37 PM

1. that's what bothered me most out of this election cycle

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 01:39 PM

2. We would have retaken the House too if not for the Gerrymandering

Ohio went big for Obama and Brown and Ds outnumber Rs but
you wouldn't know it from out Congressional Reps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Reply #2)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 01:50 PM

5. If you eliminate gerrymandering then you have to do for both sides.

Rs lost 10 seats in just two states, CA and IL, due to redistricting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #5)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 02:02 PM

8. I'll accept that risk.

Dems will win fair fight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #5)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:56 PM

16. and if you look at just one

NC we lost 4 plus a chance to regain a 5th. Oh and CA actually wasn't gerrymander nor was Florida two of our best states. Yes IL was, and we picked up 4 there but we lost far more than we gained by gerrymandering.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 01:42 PM

3. This is why it's so important to vote EVERY TIME

and vote for Democrats all the way to Dog Catcher........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 01:47 PM

4. gerrymandering

Gerrymandering should be outlawed or strictly limited. In Ohio we had it on the ballot but a huge infusion of Republican money defeated it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 01:53 PM

6. The Batshit Crazy Lady has this reason alone...

... to thank for still being able to be an embarrassment to all of us with an IQ over room temperature in our district.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 01:57 PM

7. People like to complain about gerrymandering as the cause of Dem losses.

It just is not true. Dems have their votes concentrated in heavily Dem districts in urban areas. Reps have their's spread out. So you can have 3 districts where, for example, the Dems win 90-10 in one district, and Reps win 55-45 in the other two. The total vote is Dem 180 and Rep 120 but the Rs have two districts and the Ds one district.

In addition the Voting Rights Act require minority districts be maintained. This has caused Dem minority votes to be compacted in a few districts allowing Rep to have small majorities in surrounding districts. This is why the Rs always vote to maintain the VRA. It is just math not gerrymandering. No professional campaigners think gerrymandering is much of a problem especially since it goes both ways depending on the state.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #7)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 02:04 PM

9. House districts are set up by

population. And they contort those heavy Dem districts to keep people from voting in more contested races.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Reply #9)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:47 PM

12. All House districts have relatively equal populations within a state.

Not sure of your point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #12)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:50 PM

13. Concentrating the Dem votes into one district

IS Gerrymandering.
That's my point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Reply #13)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:53 PM

15. The Voting Rights Act requires it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #15)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:46 PM

18. Not to this extent

Do the math.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #7)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:01 PM

17. actually you do have some point but the fact is the GOP killed us via gerrymanding this time

In NC we got more votes for US House and wound up with at best a 4 - 9 split in favor of the GOP (one of our four is in a recount with a small dem lead). In PA we got more US House votes and wound up with a 5 to 13 split in favor of the GOP. In Ohio we barely lost the US House vote and got a 4 to 12 split in favor of the GOP. While fair districts might have been somewhat GOP favorable (say 7 - 6) in NC they sure aren't that unfavorable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 02:04 PM

10. Michigan results-

It is true.

In MICHIGAN- Democrats got more than 64% of the vote of HOUSE districts-

but, because of gerrymandering- only got 5 of 14 House seats.


MI CONG DISTRICT
DEM REP Seat
1st- 164,541 - 166,902 R
2nd 108,957 -194,530 R
3rd 144,718 -173,084 R
4th 104,601 -196,837 R
5th 213,664 -103,396 D
6th 134,579 - 171,670 R
7th 136,508 -169,184 R
8th 128,622 -202,126 R
9th 208,834 - 114,746 D
10th 97,919 -225,811 R
11th 15,8889 -181,796 R
12th 216,537 -92,305 D
13th 235,258 -38,765 D
14th 270,184 - 51,395 D


DEM Rep
Totals: 2323811 2082547


So - IN MICHIGAN on TUESDAY-

DEMS got 2,323,811 votes for House members.
and REPS got 2,082,547

BUT- because of Gerrymandering, (Repoublican Governor, House, AND SENATE gave them full control over district design)

9 seats went to republicans- (R)


and only 5 seats went to democrats in this week's election. . 5 (D)


Source:

Michigan Secretary of State Eletion Results
http://miboecfr.nictusa.com/election/results/12GEN/06.HTM

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to James48 (Reply #10)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:04 PM

11. Thank you

Math is the Dems' friend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Reply #11)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:52 PM

14. No in that case math is the enemy of the Dems.

In Michigan the districts have compacted Dem minority districts centered around Detroit. This is because the Voting Rights Act requires districts be set up to preserve minority voting opportunities. This is allows Rep to be more spread out in smaller majorities around the state and control more districts that they normally would. Look at the figures and see the Dem majorities and see the Rep majorities. Dems have larger majorities. That is why Reps always vote to renew the VRA (along with Dem minority congressmen). It helps them out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #14)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:47 PM

19. Again

it requires minority participation. Not Ghettoization.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Reply #19)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:37 PM

20. Not really.

The courts have required minority districts to be at least 65% to 75% minority in order to ensure a minority representative would be elected. That is far more than "participation" and results with Dems being jammed into districts taking them away from surrounding districts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:49 PM

21. District lines, shouldn't resemble a Rorschach test.

In Nebraska, Obama lost the electoral vote he received in 2008, because of Gerrymandering. We lost the 2nd Congressional district, by only 3300 votes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread