One vote in wyoming weighs more than one vote in California

So you’re saying that a single voter in Wyoming voting for Candidate A means more than a single voter in California voting for Candidate A?

In order for any of Wyoming votes to even matter, the two candidates would have to be at 268-267 and need Wyoming to be the tie breaker. It would have to come down as a perfect swing state.

California’s 53 EV always matters. Harris had to win California to even have a chance at winning.

Neither candidate had to win Wyoming to win

Odds that California comes down to a 20m vs 20m tie or Wyoming coming down to a 250k vs 250k tie are basically the same.

Even if Wyoming was tied like that and 1 voter could make a difference. It would still have to be 268-267 EVs to even matter

TLDR:

Only 2 states to simplify things

Wyoming 3 EV

California 53 EV

56 EV total, 29 EV need to win

Wyoming still has more EV per capita

California wants Candidate B

Wyoming wants Candidate A

Who decides the election? (California)

If what you’re saying is that the smaller population with more EV per capita has more pull in an election, then Wyoming would actually have a shot at making Candidate A win by themselves.

California has 53/538 EV.

California controls 10% of the total EVs

Wyoming controls .06%

TLDR again:

As a voter, being able to effect 10% of the total EVs is more powerful than being able to effect .06%.

It wasn’t about how much the states electoral votes matter, but how much a single persons vote matters in the entire election.

How electoral votes matter is the whole point. If it was done by pure population they would have equal voting power. They do not have equal voting power because the electoral votes matter.

1 person in Wyoming makes more difference in how Wyoming election turns out. Less population, more influence.

There are 538 electoral votes divided over 50 states

Wyoming has 3

California has 54

Wyoming has 584k people

California has 39m people

In Wyoming each voters has 5.137E-6 electoral votes to cast

In California each voters has 8.98305085E−7 electoral votes to cast

Now winner takes all electoral votes aside. Someone in Wyoming is contributing more electoral votes to their candidate than someone in California.

This is what’s always argued when talking about voting power based on population

If the candidate needs 270 to win, if I am able to give more to a candidate with my vote, my vote is more powerful in a way.

There has been two elections decided by 3 electoral votes. 1876 Hayes and 1796 Adams. Total electoral votes at the time were 261 and 138, respectively. It would be equivalent to winning by 6 and 12 votes today with the 538 electoral votes. So while it was 3, those 3 votes meant a lot more back then when it was 3/261 or 3/138.

If 50.000 people in California changes their vote it hardly matters. If 50.000 people in wyoming do that, it heavily influences the outcome of who wyoming votes for.

Like I said earlier, yes, Wyoming voters have more influence on who wins their electoral votes and they have more electoral votes per person

California with 53 electoral votes is a 106 point swing. Taking 53 electoral votes from the winning candidate and giving it to the runner up would change the majority of all the elections.

Think of it this way:

2 states just California and Wyoming. California has 53 votes, Wyoming 3.

56 votes total. Need 29 votes to win.

Biggest issue the candidates are running on is spending money on beaches.

Candidate A: For spending

Candidate B: Against spending

California wants A, Wyoming wants B.

If what you’re saying is true, then Wyoming should have the most power in this election because each of their votes count more than a person in California.

584k deciding 3 electoral votes vs 39m deciding 53 electoral votes

Yet every single person in Wyoming could vote candidate B, and it’s still going to be up to California to decide

So would you want to be a voter in Wyoming or California?

California because your vote doesn’t matter in Wyoming. No matter who you vote for in Wyoming, California is going to decide. You want to be able to cast your vote in California to hopefully swing the state

If you gave those 584k Wyoming voters the chance to not cast their vote in Wyoming but instead cast their vote in California against the 39m, they would be wise to do it. Doesn’t matter where 3/56 electoral votes go, it matters much more where the 53/56 electoral votes go.

So yes, while each voter in California has less effect on the California electoral votes. California has more effect on the total electoral votes.

Being able to participate in a more important election is worth more than having more influence in an election that is next to meaningless.

Wyoming has the lowest population.

Makes sense why candidates spend all their time trying to get these powerful voters on their side. Those 3 electoral votes really makes it the most powerful swing state.

Someone in Wyoming has more electoral votes to their votes, yes. And I believe that is the point you’re making.

If everyone in Wyoming voted for Candidate A. Candidate A has basically the same chance of winning or losing.

If everyone in California voted for Candidate A. Candidate A has a lot better chance of winning.

It’s more powerful to be able to vote in something that actually matters than to vote in something that doesn’t.

You could just not count any votes in Wyoming and still call the overall winner 99.999% of the time. It would have to come down to 3 electoral votes tie breaker for their votes to even matter. Whereas every vote in California always matters.

Like in this last election. If Harris won every “swing state”. But Trump could have won California and he’d win the election.

Electoral college has It’s pros and cons but “The smaller the state’s population the more their vote counts.” Isn’t true.

It’s the middle size, “swing states”, that the voters have the most powerful.

You aren’t a drop in the bucket like California, but your state has enough electoral votes to actually swing things.

You can take 1% of anything, then multiply as well.

Like 7% of 15.50

1% is .155 (10% is moving decimal to left once, 1% is twice)

.155 × 7 = 1.083

That’s a hard one to do in your head, but .155 × 7 is easier to do on paper than 15.50 × .07.

Say something is 49.99 and 7% off. 1% is .5. .5 ×7 = 3.5. You could probably do that in your head. Otherwise, good luck trying to do 7% of 50 in your head.

Edit: Hmm. So you could also do 3.5% of 100 instead of 7% of 50. That would have been the easiest way to do that one.

Bonus: I thought I’d mention 11s. They are my favorite thing in math because they are so easy and you seem like a math wizard to anyone.

Say you have 42 × 11. That’s 462.

You just split apart the 4 and 2, add 4 and 2, then stick it in the middle.

Something like 67 × 11. Where the digits add >10.

6…7, 6+7=13, 6+1…3…7. So 737.

You can remove the decimal then add it back at the end

15.50

Is

1500

Half would be 775

Or 7.75

Jake being bad at acting could have been a shtick

Like “Jake you’re famous now! We need you to do commercials!” Jake “But I can’t act!”

libertery mutual, a company that is referenced in the meme, even does this with a real actor that acts like he can’t act.

Jake from state farm was supposed to be a normal dude. Him not being an actor probably makes his delivery that much better

Replacing Jake with a professional actor seems wrong. It’s no longer “Jake”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest-lasting_light_bulbs#:~:text=The world’s longest-lasting light,off a handful of times.

I knew a guy named Richard Odar, pronounced odor. He didn’t go by Dick.

Waterboy is a must

That’s why I use tungsten. The superior metal

K. Hole

deleted by creator

There are the “I like to keep my house at 66°F because I like to wear a hoodie or use a blanket”. They are going to say that 75°F is warm or even hot for a room.

If an average person sat naked in a 75°F room they would be happy.

68°F or 20°C is cold for me. Even 70°F or 21°C. I keep my house around 72° to 74°F and bump it up or down a degree. Coming in from mowing the yard, bump it down, sitting all day watching movies, keep it the same, cold winter day, bump it up.

Older people keep their houses at 78°+

100°F doesn’t mean “not fit for human habitation”

Anything above body temperature of 98.6°F (37°C) you are slowly cooking yourself. That’s why 100°F is important.

50°F is the point where you need clothes to survive. If you sat naked in a 50°F room you run the risk of your body not being able to generate enough heat and you’ll slowly die.

~75°F is room temperature. It’s in the middle on the warm side.

70°F is a cool room, 80°F is a warm room.

Whenever I think of Celsius I see it as 0° to 40° with 20° being room temperature. I hear 30°C and think halfway between 70 and 100 so I know it’s around 85°F and I know how 85°F feels.

But like 35°C. That’s 3/4 of the way from 20°C to 40°F. 100°F-70°F is 30°. 3/4 of 30 is 22.5. So 35° must be close to 70°+22.5° or ~93°F. I know how 93°F feels.

I can see how celcius is easier if you learned it as a child. 35°C would just be 35°C. But trying to quickly wrap your head around it is difficult unless you just know it. I’m sure if I said 93°F you could tell me that that is pretty hot.

You never deal with 0°C/32°F or 100°C/212°F unless you’re in a science lab.

They are nice numbers in celcius, but for real-world applications, it’s almost meaningless.

When I boil water on the stove, I don’t check if it hits 100°C. When I freeze water in the freezer, I don’t check if it hits 0°C.

Everyone can get by without knowing the exact degrees.

This is pure water at standard pressure. Higher or lower altitudes will change it, and if your water has minerals or impurities in it, it will also change it. It’s pretty arbitrary.

Water on roads can freeze before it hits 0°C outside. It can even snow above 0°C.

Fahrenheit is a very simple scale other than those two things. <0° extremely cold, >100° extremely hot for air temperature. Freezers are 0°F and Saunas are 200°F. Hot tubs are 100°F. You bake cookies at 325° to 375°, pizza is cooked at 600° to 800°F. You’ll find a lot of 25° increments in cooking.

Fahrenheit isn’t really a part of the US customary units.

Knowing both Fahrenheit and Celsius, I do think Fahrenheit is simpler for real-world applications. For science they are just numbers on a scale. Converting is the only real problem.

1 centiyard is about equal to 1 centimeter

1 miliyard is 3 milifeet

1 kiloyard is 3 kilofeet

It would be the same as the metic system having something like a “hand”

That if you wanted to express 1/3 of a meter you could just call it 1 hand. 2/3 meter would be 2 hands.

If you were using this metric system and knew that something had to be two hands long. You’d simply call it 2 hands instead of .66 meters or 66 centimeters.

If something had to be 2.5 hands long it would be .825 meters or 82.5 centimeters

Meter and yard are both random established lengths. Using miliyards or millimeters is exactly the same.

US customary units just have smaller unit names you can call them if it is convenient. If you never wanted to use anything but yards like the metric system does meters, it’s possible. Don’t want to use miles? Then megayards.

I do think 1 simple system that everyone uses is needed and the metric system is simple.

But if stupid Americans can use the “difficult” system, it can’t be too hard.

Only doesn’t change anything.

You can only buy 3 items when it says “only 3 items available”

Now if no one buys the only 3 items and Amazon gets 3 more in stock. They only have 6 items to sell. You can only buy 6 items at that time.