Another Reason You Don’t Want California and New York Deciding Elections

By now it’s old – really old – news that liberals are upset their girl didn’t make it back to the White House. The arguments, excuses and conspiracies have ranged from interesting to questionable to downright insane.

Blame James Comey. Blame the Russians. Blame the rednecks. Blame the Electoral College.

Blame everyone but themselves. Blah, blah, blah …

Liberals are quick to remind us that Hillary Clinton won nearly 3 million votes more than Donald Trump, and they’ve been quick to try to undermine a President who was elected to office by a minority of voters.

If it weren’t for that darned Electoral College.

In just California and New York alone, Clinton defeated Trump by 6 million votes. She earned one-fifth of all her votes in these two states, and three-eighths of all her total Electoral College tally.

So the truth is that had the election been decided on a strictly popular vote, California and New York would have basically chosen the President for the rest of the nation. And this is why the Electoral College method was chosen in the first place – to keep the one or two most populous states from choosing the President who would represent us all.

As if that weren’t enough …

We should also be grateful for the Electoral College for economic reasons.

The latest Rich States, Poor States report from the American Legislative Exchange Council reveals some interesting economic information about New York and California.

According to the report, New York rates 50th – yep that’s right, dead last – among the United States in overall economic outlook for 2017. California fares better than its East Coast sister state, but not by much at 47th.

As if this weren’t bad enough, the picture becomes even more bleak for liberals the further one reads up the list from the bottom. In fact, the bottom 11 states ALL voted for Hillary Clinton in November.

In contrast, the top 10 states ALL voted for Donald Trump.

All of which begs the question:  If government leaders in California and New York can’t handle economics at the state level, why would we want them making economic decisions for the entire nation?


The bottom 11:

50 New York

49 Vermont

48 New Jersey

47 California

46 Connecticut

45 Minnesota

44 Illinois

43 Hawaii

42 Maine

41 Oregon

40 Washington


The top 10:

1 Utah

2 Indiana

3 North Carolina

4 North Dakota

5 Tennessee

6 Florida

7 Wyoming

8 Arizona

9 Texas

10 Idaho

About the author

Tim Thomas

Christian home schooling father of 4 (plus one), married to the same incredible woman 26 years. Public high school and (current) college mathematics educator 14 years. Former sports writer and machinist. Proud Cruz voter.

View all posts