[jl6]

> … which means that less than 5% of Americans will truly be deciding who's in control of the House

Something about this framing seems to undersell the efforts and influence of the other 95% of voters.

If a soccer match were tied 6-6 and a last minute winner made it 6-7, the final goal scorer may be celebrated as the hero, but in truth the victory was won on the back of six other goals too.

[recursivecaveat]

In soccer goals are fungible. Votes are not fungible. Wasted or excess votes in safe districts don't sum to anything at all. Not even to mention the "fractions of a representative" a vote is worth implied by district sizes which can vary by almost 2X in the house or even more dramatically in the electoral college and senate of course.

[jl6]

I don’t think there is a material difference between goals and votes. A vote in a safe district isn’t wasted; it contributes to that district being safe. The difference is the perceived drama of being the final straw alongside all the rest of the load on the camel’s back.

[hvb2]

Yeah that really doesn't fly.

If you want to make a soccer analogy, it's like you get to pick the players on both teams. Surprise, the outcome is pretty much known in advance.

I've always liked this. In the USA, the voter doesn't pick their politician. It's the other way around, the politician picks their voters

[PhilipRoman]

I think that's an oversimplification. Voting does not have the same dynamics as soccer goals. Maybe a better analogy would be that the team is already winning 5-1 and in the last minute someone makes it 5-2. Good job of course, but can't really be said to influence the outcome.

[rbanffy]

I believe the point is that, since the electoral races are already decided in terms of party, the only decision is whom to nominate. This decision is made in the primaries, by a very small number of voters.

[otikik]

Isn’t it more like the referee being for sale? He who pays more scores more goals

[sdkfjhdsjk]

There's a reason why the majority of Americans don't bother voting. It has nothing to do with laziness or apathy. It's because voting does not matter, and never did.

It's like one of those kid steering wheels that lets the little tike pretend he's driving.

The "candidates" are preselected by powers unseen behind the curtain in smoke filled rooms, and the "choices" you are presented with are not actual choices at all.

[conception]

This is simply untrue. Conservatives have an outsized advantage because of organizing local voting. Most competitive voting areas are decided by thousands of votes, that could easily be decided by non-voters.

Also the majority of Americans do vote.

But items like vote roll purges, not having voting day be a holiday, anti-mail in ballot efforts, general lack of civic education over the years and in the msm have had a much larger effect than simple “indifference “.