As you can see by the Cook Political Report's latest presidential popular vote tally (link), Hillary Clinton's lead over her less admired rival, Donald Trump, now exceeds one million votes. And with millions more votes still to be counted from such places as California, New York, and other states where people actually live, that one million vote lead is projected to easily more than double.
California voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton. Currently her vote lead here is over 3 million, having taken nearly 62% of the state's total. And it was California's overwhelming rejection of the reactionary Donald Trump that gave her a national popular vote victory.
If you want to see how discriminatory Electoral College weighting disenfranchises voters here in the Golden State, all you have to do is some very simple math. California has a population of 39,309,017 folks, and 55 electoral votes. This translates into one Electoral College vote for every 714,709 voters.
Idaho, with a total population of 1,595,728, receives 4 votes in the Electoral College. That translates into one Electoral College vote for every 398,932 people. Which gives that state proportionally far more voting power per person when it comes to picking a President of the United States.
|Their votes count more than yours|
I think you get the point. Obviously when it comes to actually putting a President in the White House, your vote here in California counts for considerably less than someone from, say, the state that calls itself Famous Potatoes. Personally you have about 60% of the presidential electoral juice a voter in Idaho enjoys.
How do you feel about that? Do you enjoy being a second class citizen in your own country? California is the world's sixth largest economy, and contributes exponentially more in tax money than any of the pokey states mentioned above. Yet people in those places have far more power than you do when it comes to picking a president.
They blew it badly blew this election. Which brings us to this interesting article:
Californians are calling for a 'Calexit' from the US — here's how a secession could work (Business Insider link): A political group in California wants to opt out of a Donald Trump presidency by leaving the union.
The Yes California Independence Campaign aims to hold a referendum in 2018 that, if passed, would bring California one step closer to becoming an independent country.
Far-fetched as it may sound, the plan started gathering steam after Tuesday night's surprising presidential vote. The movement has an impressive backer in Shervin Pishevar, a well-known angel investor who offered to bankroll a campaign to secede.
"As the sixth-largest economy in the world, California is more economically powerful than France and has a population larger than Poland. Point by point, California compares and competes with countries, not just the 49 other states," Yes California wrote in a statement.
Louis Marinelli, an outspoken political activist and president of Yes California, envisions California as a sovereign entity within the US, much like Scotland in the United Kingdom.
There is no clear path for how California might appeal to the federal government so that it may leave. The US Constitution lays out procedures for how a new state may enter the union, but there are no protocols for a nation to exit.
Marinelli, however, sees a workaround — with a ballot measure passed by California voters.
In 2015, Marinelli paid $200 each to get nine initiatives related to secession on a statewide ballot, according to The Los Angeles Times. None garnered the nearly 400,000 signatures necessary to appear on the ballot. So Marinelli and his followers are forced to start over.
Yes California now aims to gather enough signatures to put an initiative on the ballot in 2018, when Californians will choose their next governor, for a referendum in 2019.
That certainly would be interesting. Bye bye Famous Potatoes.