A good for reason for each demographic group to vote separately?

[SaveTheMackerel]

Suppose a particular minority does not vote much compared to a more fluent group.

If we know that 20% of the population, being a certain race or group, has 10% turnout, and the other 80% has 75% turnout, is it right to count their votes in total, 0.2*0.1 + 0.8*0.75? If the groups were separated and voted at different locations, then even if the minority had a low turnout, we could let those who show up represent those who did not. Their votes would still count for 20%, and those in the majority who showed up would still represent their group and count for the 80%.

This way, even if mail in votes are deliberately lost, it would not change the outcome by much.


If 100 Californians show up the polls, and a million New Yorkers show up, the electoral votes for the Californians still count for more. I'm thinking the same concept, but local, by demographic, and not winner takes all, just proportional.

[SheilaT]

1. I am not sure I fully understand you.

First off, what exactly do you mean by a more fluent group? Is mastery of the English language an issue?

Secondly, I'm oddly in favor of the one person one vote concept. If a particular group shows up in lower numbers than their actually representation in the population, I'm sorry, but that should not make my vote count any less.