I used to watch TV for hours and hours on election night. What a crash course on American politics. Pundits, commentators, reporters all come out to analyze the past, the present, the exit polls, the historical similarities and differences with past elections. Reagan and Nixon are mentioned very often, which I don’t know why. How about other presidents who deserve to be remembered on a night like this? I used to imagine that the swing states were established because in the early days it is impossible for politicians to travel vast distances on horse driven carriages for campaigns. It’s just impossible. So swing states came to the rescue. Politicians only need to concentrate on three or four swing states. However after watching election nights TV, I came to understand that’s not the case. Swing states came into existence on its own. Nobody really did anything to establish them.
However, 2016 really changed me. I was so shocked that I had to stop watching all together. So the pundits and commentators and statistics and polling and the Las Vegas bets were all wrong and had been wrong all along. What’s the point of watching if all one could get were wrong information?
I confess I do watch the elections in Britain. Even though they have meade me depressed for years!
Many thanks for following my blog.
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Politics is depressing here, there, elsewhere.
LikeLiked by 1 person
All because we have the most unique yet weird election system. I cannot find any other country which might have similar election as the US. Why my vote in New Jersey is not equal to a vote in Nebraska? The swing state phenomenon has made both candidates repeatedly visiting one state during their election campaign while neglecting those “non-swing” states. How many times has either candidate visited states such as NJ, NY, and CA in this election comparing their visits with states such as PA, FL or MICH? Are we less important or are we truly represented?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Agreed with you.
LikeLiked by 1 person