just out of whack our Senate really is

[lapfog_1]

so I didn't want to listen to the Senate anymore today... and being bored I decided to finally do a project I've been thinking about for a while... namely summing up all of the votes (numerically, not percentage) that elected each of our 100 Senators.

Grouping our D Senators with Sanders and King (who only represent 575,978 yes voters between them so they aren't a large factor).

total votes that got them elected (or their predecessor in the case of appointment)... 78,520,914 voting in favor, 52,227,186 voted for someone else (usually an "R", but then there were the D votes in the case of Sanders, King, and other candidate in LA in some years).

That's what our 49 Senators represent.

Plus a boatload more of people that didn't vote.

Now for the 51 "R"s ... those voting in favor 53,833,961 voted in their states, and 38,868,219 voted for somebody else.

Of course, this wasn't in one year but spread over the last 6 years... including some special elections.

so our 49 Senators represent 24,686,953 MORE YES votes than the majority 51 Senators... which is nearly 50% of the total YES votes for the assholes controlling our lives.

How long will the majority be ruled by the minority?

(Lawrence is covering this right now!) How appropriate.

[Alpeduez21]

1. Until the majority TAKES power

They won't give it to us. No quarter. No compromise. DEFEAT them.

[oberliner]

2. The Great Compromise of 1787

The Great Compromise of 1787, also known as the Sherman Compromise, was an agreement reached during the Constitutional Convention of 1787 between delegates of the states with large and small populations that defined the structure of Congress and the number of representatives each state would have in Congress according to the United States Constitution. Under the agreement proposed by Connecticut delegate Roger Sherman, Congress would be a “bicameral” or two-chambered body, with each state getting a number of representatives in the lower chamber (the House) proportional to its population and two representatives in the upper chamber (the Senate).

https://www.thoughtco.com/great-compromise-of-1787-3322289

[dpibel]

3. Except, of course

that the number of representatives was frozen at 435 as of 1913.

Which means that the House is no longer proportionally representative and the smallest states are overrepresented in both the House and the Senate.

But, of course, you knew that.

[lapfog_1]

5. Bingo... Every state gets at least 1 rep.

[lapfog_1]

4. They never imagined a California and a Wyoming.

My vote here in CA counts something like 68 times LESS than a voter in Wyoming.

How is this fair?

Yes, I know the history. It was a mistake... much like the 2nd amendment should have been clarified... and I'm sure they never imagined Las Vegas style mass shootings.

Not to mention counting slaves at 3/5 of a person for the census. We amended the constitution to remove that error... we need to fix the other errors.

[Garrett78]

9. Back when the smallest state had 1/10th the voting-eligible population of the largest state.

1/10th is bad enough, but that pales in comparison to today's ratios.

[onecaliberal]

6. If by out of whack you mean criminal fascist thugs, then yes.

[lapfog_1]

7. The thing is those criminal facist rape happy thugs

represent a minority of all American voters. By a significant margin.

We should be able (if our forefathers had insisted that either states all be relatively the same population or adjusted the membership in the Senate by some mechanism to correct the imbalance)... to control these bastards. They should not be in power.

[onecaliberal]

8. Agree. I don't think the founders could have ever imagined a world such as this.