@Dorsai Okay, let's get rid of California, all those stinking liberals are idiots. But, while we're at it, let's get rid of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, and Mississippi.
Why those specific states? Because added together, they have roughly the same number of Trump voters as California had Clinton voters.
Oddly enough, I don't hear people calling for Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, and Mississippi to be thrown out of elections. Why? Because it sounds stupid when you put it this way. Go figure.
FYI, here's my math in case anyone wants to double check my numbers
Clinton voters in California: 8,753,788
Trump Voters in Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, and Mississippi: 684,872+1,252,401+163,387+1,318,255+409,055+1,557,286+800,983+671,018+1,202,971+700,714=8760942
BTW, I probably could've pulled even more states out of my a** that voted trump that could be kicked out and still have a lower number of Trump votes than California Clinton voters, these aren't even the least populous Trump states, I was just lazy and went in alphabetical order off of wikipedia, if I actually put more than 5 minutes of work into this, I could probably come up with even more less populous states to substitute for the more populous ones. Or, I could compile a list of states whose DIFFERENCE of Trump voters to Clinton voters equals California's difference in Clinton to Trump voters. But that would take way too much time, and would probably have at least a dozen states on the list (since I would like to remind you that our president won by hair's breadths in certain states).
So, TL;DR, I could make your concept of disregarding California look even stupider if I wanted to. With math. Don't try me.
0
@Dorsai Okay, let's get rid of California, all those stinking liberals are idiots. But, while we're at it, let's get rid of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, and Mississippi.
Why those specific states? Because added together, they have roughly the same number of Trump voters as California had Clinton voters.
Oddly enough, I don't hear people calling for Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, and Mississippi to be thrown out of elections. Why? Because it sounds stupid when you put it this way. Go figure.
FYI, here's my math in case anyone wants to double check my numbers
Clinton voters in California: 8,753,788
Trump Voters in Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, and Mississippi: 684,872+1,252,401+163,387+1,318,255+409,055+1,557,286+800,983+671,018+1,202,971+700,714=8760942
BTW, I probably could've pulled even more states out of my a** that voted trump that could be kicked out and still have a lower number of Trump votes than California Clinton voters, these aren't even the least populous Trump states, I was just lazy and went in alphabetical order off of wikipedia, if I actually put more than 5 minutes of work into this, I could probably come up with even more less populous states to substitute for the more populous ones. Or, I could compile a list of states whose DIFFERENCE of Trump voters to Clinton voters equals California's difference in Clinton to Trump voters. But that would take way too much time, and would probably have at least a dozen states on the list (since I would like to remind you that our president won by hair's breadths in certain states).
So, TL;DR, I could make your concept of disregarding California look even stupider if I wanted to. With math. Don't try me.