FYI...my thoughts.
This election would turn on three states, Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio; three KEY swing states. The winner of two out of those three would win the election, period. I think the final week and a half or so of campaigning bears this out. Scuttlebutt from the last few days of the campaign might even indicate that Florida was out of play for the Dims, which would have left only Pennsylvania and Ohio to swing the election. And looking back at the campaigns would suggest both parties put their final resources into Ohio although "W" made a major push for Pennsylvania late. THEY knew something we may have divined from their actions in the final hours. Both campaigns were fighting for those last 20 electoral votes in Ohio.
Now, one could say the system works based on the outcome, but consider the difference those roughly 140,000 Ohio votes could have made if they had gone to the Bolshevik. And one must also consider the 2000 outcome when popular and electoral votes are discussed.
Which brings me to my point. It's my understanding the electoral college was designed to keep the population centers from dictating to the rest of the country, but I haven't researched it enough to be sure. If that in fact is the case, it almost got turned on its head this time. IOW, we could have gone from a mandate for "W" to a traitor being placed in the White House on the strength of ~140,000 popular votes.
So, to me it was much too close for comfort, the popular vote notwithstanding. Does the electoral system need another look? I dunno, but at least this time it was almost a disaster for conservatives.
Thoughts?
FGS
Jeff put me on that ping list I like the way you think.
The "blue" or red for your purposes went democrat majority and therefore are shaded as such but the margins are not as close as we are led to believe by thier shading.
RB<><