Exactly, the whole winner take all deal means not a single presidential vote I have made ever meant anything. The majority of electoral votes in my state were for the other party. So my preferred parties electoral votes won magically become the other parties. If they forced states to split electoral votes places like Texas and California would have a much different impact on elections.
It might feel that way, but gerrymandering is specifically for the House of Representative districts. It has no bearing on the outcome of presidential elections.
The electoral college definitely feels like a form of gerrymandering.
Exactly, the whole winner take all deal means not a single presidential vote I have made ever meant anything. The majority of electoral votes in my state were for the other party. So my preferred parties electoral votes won magically become the other parties. If they forced states to split electoral votes places like Texas and California would have a much different impact on elections.
I believe that some states do allocate their electoral college votes by percentage.
That’s not what gerrymandering is, no. Words have meaning.
Not to defend the electoral college, it should be abolished.
It might feel that way, but gerrymandering is specifically for the House of Representative districts. It has no bearing on the outcome of presidential elections.
Splitting the Dakota territory could be seen as a form of gerrymandering.
I guess, but that happened over 130 years ago.
The electoral college was put in place to prevent people like Trump from being elected, so it’s not even functioning as intended.