Agree and we need more parties.
I say we do away with political parties altogether. Too many people base their votes on whether the person has a D or R next to their name without even knowing their positions.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Agree and we need more parties.
No presidential candidate spends time in low population states now. When you look at cost/person to advertise, it's much cheaper to advertise in low population states. Plus, when you ignore places you tend to lose 70-30 instead of 55-45I think it’s pretty easy to understand. No Presidential candidate would spend a minute in states with low population. California, Florida, Texas, NY and a few others would determine the president.
Except for the time they spend in Iowa, New Hampshire, etc.No presidential candidate spends time in low population states now. When you look at cost/person to advertise, it's much cheaper to advertise in low population states. Plus, when you ignore places you tend to lose 70-30 instead of 55-45
1.) They are already invested in those states from the primaries.Except for the time they spend in Iowa, New Hampshire, etc.
It’s not population that determines how many days they spend now as much as it is whether the state could swing one way or another. Republicans don’t spend a lot of time in deep blue states and vice versa. Instead, they focus on Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, etc.1.) They are already invested in those states from the primaries.
2.) Rarely do they spend time in NH because it's part of the Boston media market
3.) Iowa has 7 electoral votes.
I think it’s pretty easy to understand. No Presidential candidate would spend a minute in states with low population. California, Florida, Texas, NY and a few others would determine the president.