General Discussion

Ichingcarpenter

(36,988 posts) Sat Jan 3, 2015, 05:53 PM Jan 2015

The Senate's 46 Democrats got 20 million more votes than its 54 Republicans [View all]

On Tuesday, 33 US senators elected in November will be sworn in by Vice President Joe Biden — including 12 who are new to the chamber. The class includes 22 Republicans and 11 Democrats, a big reason why the GOP has a 54-46 majority in the Senate overall.

But here's a crazy fact: those 46 Democrats got more votes than the 54 Republicans across the 2010, 2012, and 2014 elections. According to Nathan Nicholson, a researcher at the voting reform advocacy group FairVote, "the 46 Democratic caucus members in the 114th Congress received a total of 67.8 million votes in winning their seats, while the 54 Republican caucus members received 47.1 million votes."
http://www.vox.com/2015/1/3/7482635/senate-small-states/in/5654656

I love how democracy works.

149 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Senate's 46 Democrats got 20 million more votes than its 54 Republicans [View all] Ichingcarpenter Jan 2015 OP

This message was self-deleted by its author panader0 Jan 2015 #1

How does gerrymandering affect Senate seats? n/t cherokeeprogressive Jan 2015 #2

Wyoming gets 2 seats and California gets 2 seats WhaTHellsgoingonhere Jan 2015 #16

That's not gerrymandering n/t SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #18

not in name but in fact WhaTHellsgoingonhere Jan 2015 #21

Oh, OK SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #22

I'd whack the Senate WhaTHellsgoingonhere Jan 2015 #23

Then you believe SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #24

Every state has to deal with that. California is home to "Texans" and "Oklahomans" WhaTHellsgoingonhere Jan 2015 #28

No...just make the Senate half the size of the House Ken Burch Jan 2015 #141

The 435 seats in the House are apportioned among the states by population after every census. amandabeech Jan 2015 #143

Which is all tied to the morally-discredited "three-fifths" compromise Ken Burch Jan 2015 #144

and DC gets NONE, even though DebJ Jan 2015 #139

Not gerrymandering. That does not exist in the Senate. Senators are elected by popular madinmaryland Jan 2015 #3

My mistake oops panader0 Jan 2015 #5

Senators are installed after large sums of money are alocatted towards them nolabels Jan 2015 #65

America's version of the Parliamentary Rotten Boroughs First Speaker Jan 2015 #4

it's certainly not gerrymandering hfojvt Jan 2015 #6

Where did I say Gerrymandering? Ichingcarpenter Jan 2015 #8

I guess SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #9

Why sarcasm? rogerashton Jan 2015 #32

I'm not in favor of one party rule SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #33

And what does that have to do with this thread? eom rogerashton Jan 2015 #63

Seriously? n/t SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #64

I thought this thread was about minority rule -- rogerashton Jan 2015 #66

Perhaps you should take a second to re-read the exchange SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #69

So you are happy with the minority rule that the op pointed out? rogerashton Jan 2015 #70

We are not under minority rule SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #77

You disagree with the OP, me, and the facts. eom rogerashton Jan 2015 #115

Your "facts" are questionable SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #116

Then you must not really be all that sick of the one percent. villager Jan 2015 #79

Right... SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #81

Well, it's a good thing that that laid-out government eventually gave slaves "personhood" villager Jan 2015 #82

Some citizens votes have always gone unheeded SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #83

It's interesting how vociferously you defend the rule of the one percent villager Jan 2015 #84

The House represents a majority who voted. former9thward Jan 2015 #102

Actually, no. Due to gerrymandering, Democrats received more House votes villager Jan 2015 #103

No, not this year. former9thward Jan 2015 #109

But it happens in years when D's get millions more votes, as well villager Jan 2015 #111

No, it was a necessary and enlightened compromise that helped form the union. branford Jan 2015 #119

Alternatively, we could have proportional representation in the Senate. JDPriestly Jan 2015 #125

Where did I say that you said gerrymandering hfojvt Jan 2015 #60

Not this year. former9thward Jan 2015 #100

And for the umpty millionth time SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #7

Yet you are sick of the one pct. Ichingcarpenter Jan 2015 #11

So what? Once again, we see how people in small states have a disproportionate pnwmom Jan 2015 #54

We know how it's set up and why. OnionPatch Jan 2015 #86

Of course you have a right to say so SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #96

It just seems to me like OnionPatch Jan 2015 #113

If you feel you're being treated unfairly SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #114

Bringing up the fact that the Senate actually represents thucythucy Jan 2015 #127

Youre name is revealing Ramses Jan 2015 #142

What an odd post SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #145

So would you solve this by forced relocation of people so every state has the same population? onenote Jan 2015 #10

Me? I would get rid of the Senate Ichingcarpenter Jan 2015 #13

Me too. Maybe we'll have that someday mountain grammy Jan 2015 #40

Parliamentary systems are hardly free of strife and inefficiency, branford Jan 2015 #121

Our system would probably work fine without the money and corruption.. mountain grammy Jan 2015 #122

Humans are selfish and imperfect, branford Jan 2015 #123

Interesting idea. Sadly we never see any much needed governmental changes on the national level. maddiemom Jan 2015 #149

Maybe we could redraw all state boarders to achieve the same effect hughee99 Jan 2015 #14

I think Wyoming, Idaho and Montana should be one state, and North and South Dakota should be one, Vattel Jan 2015 #15

Maybe California should be gladium et scutum Jan 2015 #38

Give all 50 states one senator, and apportion the rest according to the population at large... First Speaker Jan 2015 #20

^^^^^^representation according to population^^^^^^^ Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #29

We have that. Indydem Jan 2015 #101

No, we do not, that is representation according to gerrymandering. Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #107

This was due to the Great Compromise. MohRokTah Jan 2015 #12

which gave slave owning states Ichingcarpenter Jan 2015 #17

The end effect was California vs. Wyoming. MohRokTah Jan 2015 #19

the end effect is you got Judge Thomas Ichingcarpenter Jan 2015 #30

So amend the constitution MohRokTah Jan 2015 #34

Yep SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #36

An alternative could be to bring government closer to the people HereSince1628 Jan 2015 #68

You cannot amend the Constitution to reduce or change the state's representation in the Senate, kelly1mm Jan 2015 #88

Sure you can. MohRokTah Jan 2015 #89

No, you really can't. Article 5 is the 'Amendment' Article of the Constitution. It sets kelly1mm Jan 2015 #90

GOOD POINT! MohRokTah Jan 2015 #94

Exactly. Even less likely because of unintended consequences. In my opinion, if a Constitutional kelly1mm Jan 2015 #104

There are ways to do it. NYC Liberal Jan 2015 #128

I do not believe you can amend by appeal a section of the constitution that has it's entire kelly1mm Jan 2015 #129

There's nothing that says that section itself can't be repealed. NYC Liberal Jan 2015 #132

This is an excellent article and it makes a good case... mountain grammy Jan 2015 #43

This is a particularly silly statistic onenote Jan 2015 #25

+1000000 n/t SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #26

You are correct, and this is a good point. SpankMe Jan 2015 #47

Changing this would require a constitutional amendment Nye Bevan Jan 2015 #27

100% correct SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #31

You couldn't get a 2/3 majority in the Senate, either. eom MohRokTah Jan 2015 #35

You cannot amend the Constitution to reduce or change the state's representation in the Senate, kelly1mm Jan 2015 #91

Interesting, I was not aware of that. Thanks. (nt) Nye Bevan Jan 2015 #92

The Senate was never supposed to be about Democracy davidn3600 Jan 2015 #37

That's because Red States have lower populations.... Spitfire of ATJ Jan 2015 #39

RI was a bastion of religious freedom surrounded by puritans dsc Jan 2015 #61

That may be how it STARTED but as John Oliver says, "Why is this still a thing?" Spitfire of ATJ Jan 2015 #62

Jeb Bush...Please Pay Attention billhicks76 Jan 2015 #41

If the people of this country are stupid enough to let Jeb, another Bush be elected in this short appalachiablue Jan 2015 #93

It may or may not happen, but .. dawg Jan 2015 #108

C'MON...Bush Sr Has Been Running Things Since 1975 billhicks76 Jan 2015 #118

There's some truth to that. dawg Jan 2015 #120

Yes Thank You!!!!! billhicks76 Jan 2015 #124

It may be time to add some senators jmowreader Jan 2015 #42

This is truly a danger to our democracy. kentuck Jan 2015 #44

Wait, what? As if there are only ever 2 parties, and they are always equal?!?!? X_Digger Jan 2015 #45

I guess they would have to include independents and others? kentuck Jan 2015 #49

those are talk radio states and the only reason the GOP is still in the running certainot Jan 2015 #46

Not only Americans, Dems. have given Hate Media free reign for 20+ years. And it shows. appalachiablue Jan 2015 #95

This is an issue that should be taken seriously Hutzpa Jan 2015 #48

yes, I totally agree, that is how elections are stolen dem in texas Jan 2015 #50

I'm all for getting rid of the senate, sulphurdunn Jan 2015 #51

Looking at the behavior of the House versus the Senate over the last few years, Nye Bevan Jan 2015 #58

The argument for oligarchy and against democracy sulphurdunn Jan 2015 #73

Dare I suggest... "Party Lists"? mwooldri Jan 2015 #52

A perfect way to give power to the Todd Akins. Nye Bevan Jan 2015 #55

The British system is really similar to ours -- rogerashton Jan 2015 #67

The problem with party lists is that people in the same party can be very different LeftishBrit Jan 2015 #146

I wonder if the Founders edhopper Jan 2015 #53

I doubt that it was even on their radar screens. Nye Bevan Jan 2015 #56

And they were just trying to keep the country together. edhopper Jan 2015 #57

They were sure of it, that's why they made hughee99 Jan 2015 #71

They were sure there would be edhopper Jan 2015 #75

In 1770 VA had about 450k people hughee99 Jan 2015 #76

Umm... yeah. They did because they saw it then. bobclark86 Jan 2015 #133

yes edhopper Jan 2015 #135

Yeah, the would have... bobclark86 Jan 2015 #136

I am well aware of the history edhopper Jan 2015 #137

There are forces far more powerful than us keeping these assholes in power. Initech Jan 2015 #59

Hey, don't you people know that empty acreage is more important than actual people? Arugula Latte Jan 2015 #72

"The Senate is a profoundly anti-democratic body and should be abolished." Indydem Jan 2015 #74

+1000000 n/t SickOfTheOnePct Jan 2015 #78

hmm.. GummyBearz Jan 2015 #85

Wouldn't that be grandson? Revanchist Jan 2015 #134

Youre right GummyBearz Jan 2015 #140

"It's not supposed to be Democratic" is a bug, not a feature. Donald Ian Rankin Jan 2015 #112

Interesting all the defense of minority rightwing rule that this post sparks... villager Jan 2015 #80

fix this in this cycle WRH2 Jan 2015 #87

That's the way it's intended in the Senate LittleBlue Jan 2015 #97

Thanks Founding Fathers for such a great democracy! tabasco Jan 2015 #98

A parliamentary system has its own problems. Nye Bevan Jan 2015 #99

True, but people knew who to blame or credit for what the government was doing. dawg Jan 2015 #110

This message was self-deleted by its author valerief Jan 2015 #105

Those 20 million voices will not be heard. nt valerief Jan 2015 #106

Maybe that's because this country is owned and ruled by the minority not the majority . geretogo Jan 2015 #117

I guess you don't understand the constitution and the fact that beachbum bob Jan 2015 #126

if repugs were in this position they'd be screaming like maniacs and playing victim samsingh Jan 2015 #130

That why we also have the House of Representatives oberliner Jan 2015 #131

This article shows how the GOP has fraud the election system, sammy750 Jan 2015 #138

No - this article shows the arrangement made 200+ years ago to buy the support of smaller States... brooklynite Jan 2015 #147

No, this article shows how statistics can be made to show almost anything onenote Jan 2015 #148