Republicans pretty much dominate the legislatures in the states I mentioned. For example, in Ohio the Senate has 23 Republicans and just 10 Democrats. And in the Ohio House of Representatives, there are 60 Republicans and 39 Democrats with the Republicans actually having gained a seat in this last election. With that kind of breakdown, it is beyond strange that Democrats were able to prevail in the statewide elections.
This is exactly my point after looking at the map and knowing the majority the Republicans hold in our state. There is something seriously wrong with all of this.
In some counties, Mitt trounced Obama and in others, he narrowly won. But, it was supposedly, the most populated DEM counties which gave Obama the win. How can a state, and that goes for some others as well, elect such a large majority of Republicans to state seats and then vote heavily for Obama when its a known fact that there are smaller turnouts for state races. Maybe that’s where the difference lies - some only turn out for presidential elections??
I don’t know, I’m still trying to sort this out in my own mind and heart.
If you’ll notice, it says these results are unofficial. I don’t know if the military and provisional ballots were counted yet and included in these numbers or not.
You dodged the statement but it does not matter.
Not a single ‘swing state’ swung so it is all about getting federal PIE whilst forcing more work on the producers in each state.
This is how socialism works.
The black votes are all stuffed into a couple of D districts keeping the R districts safe, so the R's dominate the state legislature. The House races were similar: 12R to 4D.
The proof of gerrymandering is easy: The R winning percentages were 58, 59, 59, 57, 53, 57, 100 (Boehner unopposed), 60, 64, 54, 62, 52
The D winning percentages were: 68, 73, 100 (unopposed), 72.
The gerrymandering doesn't help in Senate and Presidential races.