>>
>>As for why California should count for a lot more, how about because a lot more people live there? As of the 2010 census, the population of CA was over 39 million. That's more than the total of the smallest 20 states plus DC.
>>
>
>Nice try - but California in this election was essentially a one party state. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there were no Republicans on the ballot in California in this election.

There were no Republican Senate candidates in the general because the state is now using a jungle primary system. There were, of course, elections for all 53 House seats. Since 14 of them were won by Republicans, there were certainly Republicans on the ballot. There were also races for the CA legislature. Looks like Republicans won 14 seats in the state senate and 25 in the assembly. So, yes, you're wrong (though I'll accept that you may have omitted the word "statewide" above).


>Again - please point me to one post you made prior to this election where you made these arguments. Because as it stands, these are all "after the fact" arguments.

I don't remember discussing the EC before the election.

Tamar