Of course, we all know this. Over the past several presidential elections I have noticed that candidates tend to run, not for the popular vote, but rather for the electoral votes... spending more time in high-value electoral vote states than in smaller states with fewer electoral votes.
This is quite a change from the old days when candidates would do "whistle stop" speeches from the back of a train that stopped in every town across the country. They were running for the popular vote and it often worked.
But with modern technology and easy travel, campaigns could focus on the real path to victory by using the Electoral College approach and getting to the magic number of 270 by focusing on high value electoral states. Technology would carry the message to other places like Mesquite, TX and Erwin, TN and Springdale, UT, places you've probably never heard of but the residents of those places got the very same campaign news and coverage as the big places did.
Of course, we all know this. Over the past several presidential elections I have noticed that candidates tend to run, not for the popular vote, but rather for the electoral votes... spending more time in high-value electoral vote states than in smaller states with fewer electoral votes.
This is quite a change from the old days when candidates would do "whistle stop" speeches from the back of a train that stopped in every town across the country. They were running for the popular vote and it often worked.
But with modern technology and easy travel, campaigns could focus on the real path to victory by using the Electoral College approach and getting to the magic number of 270 by focusing on high value electoral states. Technology would carry the message to other places like Mesquite, TX and Erwin, TN and Springdale, UT, places you've probably never heard of but the residents of those places got the very same campaign news and coverage as the big places did.