Printable Version of this PageHome PageRecent ChangesSearchSign In

3 September 2006 - blog

I've never liked the electoral college system that the U.S.A. uses to elect a President. It is an antequated system, more indicative of the times in which it was created than the spirit of democracy. We easily have the technology now to go by a popular vote—one person, one vote. With the current system, your vote effectively counts more if you live in a swing state—those states that are in contention. Hence, politicians are more likely to cater to the beliefs and needs of those swing-state voters; that's not good representation. I've created an image that reflects my position.
2004 Electoral College Results (alphabetically)
In the image (PDF Version), each state is represented by its star. The area of the star reflects the number of electoral votes that state has (e.g., California is the biggest star). The color of the star represents which way it swung in the 2004 Presidential Election (Republican, Democrat). The states are listed alphabetically (left to right, top to bottom); D.C. is represented by the star in the lower right corner. The meaning of the diagram is that a voter is not a star; finding which star represents you is silly, even if it is an interesting puzzle (figure out which star is Georgia, for instance). We are all citizens of this country, each of us should get our own vote.

I chose the 2004 Presidential Election (instead of 2000, the more famous electoral college example), because I did not want to make a partisan political statement. Bush/Cheney, the Republican ticket, had clear majorities in both the popular vote and the electoral college that year. My point is not that the wrong candidates won, but rather that the system (you are represented by a star with a certain area) is absurd.