You might want to sit down for this one … but it turns out that the total population of states served by U.S. Senators who voted to convict Donald Trump outweighs that of those who voted to acquit. How is this possible?
Vox’s Ian Millhiser breaks it down for all the Boomer rubes. First, a reminder:
We are heading toward a future where the Senate will routinely feature a majority that represents far less than half of the nation, warns @imillhiser. https://t.co/B56oBzuy0R
— Vox (@voxdotcom) February 6, 2020
And now, let’s get topical:
The 48 senators who voted to remove Trump represent 53 percent of the nation. https://t.co/EljQBZhq9m
— Vox (@voxdotcom) February 6, 2020
Trump being acquitted by the Senate was even less democratic than you think https://t.co/bpyWjml0OG
— Ian Millhiser (@imillhiser) February 6, 2020
It’s almost as if we’re not set up as a democracy!
Millhiser writes:
The reality, though, is that the only reason a majority of the Senate voted to keep Trump in office is that the body is configured in a way that systemically advantages Republicans. The blue state of California has 68 times as many people as the red state of Wyoming, for example, but both states still receive two senators.
Democrats actually control a majority of the Senate seats (26-24) representing the most populous half of the states. Republicans owe their majority in the Senate as a whole to their 29-21 lead in the least populous half of the states. This means that overall, the current Republican Senate “majority” represents about 15 million fewer people than the Democratic “minority.”
Recommended
Outrages. The Lefty Blue-Check Brigade needs to spread this far and wide.
The 48 Senators who found Trump GUILTY represent 18 million MORE people than the 52 who voted not guilty.
— Lawrence O'Donnell (@Lawrence) February 5, 2020
Mind-blowing stat: 48 Senators who voted to convict Trump represent 18 million more Americans than 52 Republicans who voted to acquit
— Ari Berman (@AriBerman) February 5, 2020
48 Senators who voted to convict Trump of abuse of power represent 170 million people
52 Senators who voted to acquit represent 152 million people
In US Senate majority represents minority
Here is math via @imillhiser https://t.co/CUGuzaSpDk
— Ari Berman (@AriBerman) February 5, 2020
Ah, yes. Math by Millhiser™. Always worth paying attention to.
This scoop is so hot, it got retweeted by none other than AOC herself:
Apparently the fact that AOC is a U.S. Representative doesn’t mean that she knows the difference between the House of Representatives and the Senate.
Alexa, what is a senate https://t.co/OeNw8fpUDi
— It's still 2016 apparently (@jtLOL) February 6, 2020
Millhiser is Millhiser, but doesn’t his work have to go through editors who might be familiar with concepts like ‘the senate’? Help him instead of enabling him. Help him learn. https://t.co/vOIwZ5hHCc
— Seth Mandel (@SethAMandel) February 6, 2020
The Senate was not set up to represent based on population. That's why you have the House. C'mon folks, we learned the Connecticut Compromise in third grade civics.
— Gettysburg Live (@Gettysburg_Live) February 6, 2020
Maybe now you can do a Voxplainer on how to take a civics class.
— Mark C, austere BBQ scholar ?? (@UntraceableMC) February 6, 2020
Aside from the fact that the Senate is not based on states’ populations, there’s the whole thing about the Senate not having come close to meeting the required threshold to remove the president from office.
Trump wouldn't have been convicted with even 53 votes tho https://t.co/MkOlJ22Zpf
— JERRY DUNLEAVY (@JerryDunleavy) February 6, 2020
So well short of 67% then.
— Right In The Middle (@MDHtoo) February 6, 2020
The number of Senators required to remove a President is 67, not 50, idiots. https://t.co/dnW5UJpvkx
— Reagan Battalion (@ReaganBattalion) February 6, 2020
You absolutely, incurably ignorant prat, none of this matters because the rules require SIXTY-SEVEN VOTES. https://t.co/3eTWponLeq
— Esoteric Jeff (@EsotericCD) February 6, 2020
What’s really funny is that Millhiser himself acknowledges this:
As a practical matter, Trump likely would remain in office even if the Senate were not malapportioned. The Constitution provides that, in an impeachment trial, “no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two thirds of the members present.” In a Senate fairly apportioned by population, Democrats would have a majority, but they almost certainly would not have a large enough majority to remove a president.’
So, basically, what we have here is Millhiser admitting that the entire point of his article today is, well, pointless. It’s almost as if he knows he’s completely full of crap and doesn’t give a crap.
I think what bothers me about Millhiser is what bugs me about Yglesias: they are both very winkingly self-conscious in that "haha aren't I a stinker?" way, about their dishonesty. It's all just funny games to them, a "let's try and put one over on these ignorant rubes" schtick.
— Esoteric Jeff (@EsotericCD) February 6, 2020
Say what you will about the corrosive hyper-sarcasm of the Chapo types, at least you get the idea that they genuinely *believe* in something, which is something I can respect. These guys? They believe in nothing except their own private intellectual and educational superiority.
— Esoteric Jeff (@EsotericCD) February 6, 2020
Join the conversation as a VIP Member