Tweet
As long as any changes don't favor the democrats, I'd be cool with it.
-
For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence) -
The two parties engineered the "winner takes all" electoral vote system just to prevent any third parties from breaking in to the system.
Perhaps I'm not reading this correctly, but given that the electoral system was in place before there were the two parties, hell, even before there was a country, how do you think they arranged this?Comment
-
"You're the biggest user of hindsight that I've ever known. Your favorite team, in any sport, is the one that just won. If you were a woman, you'd likely be a slut." - Slowwhand, to Imran
Eschewing silly games since December 4, 2005Comment
-
Ah yes, I forgot, being boring is worse than fvcking up the economy, fighting useless wars and generally play the big dumbass...Originally posted by Giancarlo
Nice attack, no cigar. Kerry is a lot worse then Bore, I mean Gore.
But then Bush is sooooooo sympathic!!
Comment
-
The elector system was in place but the "winner takes all" system was a modern change which the two parties pushed through. It prevents small parties from ever getting electoral votes and it also prevents third parties from taking off because they'd have to go from zero to 51% in a single vote before they'd ever carry a state.Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.Comment
-
How the electoral votes are divided are a state issue, not a federal issue. The states could divide the electoral votes proportionally within each state.
The bigger problem is that most of the states have set very high barriers to getting on the ballot unless you're in one of the two major parties (witness the Democrats running around trying to knock Nader off the ballot).
Also, without an IRV or proportional voting for legistlatures, people who'd prefer to vote for another party, can't for fear of the spoiler effect.Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...Comment
-
Nice mess up again! Bush didn't mess up the economy (it is booming), the Iraq war was a liberation war liberating millions.. and Bush isn't a dumbass.Originally posted by Atahualpa
Ah yes, I forgot, being boring is worse than fvcking up the economy, fighting useless wars and generally play the big dumbass...
But then Bush is sooooooo sympathic!!
For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
I think you're the one messing things. Liberation war? I'd call it the flip-flop war. First it's about the ghost story that is WMD, now it's about liberating iraqis and after finding out, they don't really want the american way it will be about oil and money.
But at least he wasn't boring. I mean, that would have really totally sucked!Comment
-
There you go again messing up! That's sad whenever you say something it doesn't quite.. come out accurate. I don't know that feeling since everything I say is right.Originally posted by Atahualpa
I think you're the one messing things. Liberation war? I'd call it the flip-flop war. First it's about the ghost story that is WMD, now it's about liberating iraqis and after finding out, they don't really want the american way it will be about oil and money.
But at least he wasn't boring. I mean, that would have really totally sucked!For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
Would you two chill...
Discuss the topic. lay off of each other.Keep on Civin'
RIP rah, Tony Bogey & Baron OComment
-
Ross Perot elected Clinton.Originally posted by Oerdin
Why is it Ross Perot got 21% of the popular vote but 0% of the electoral vote? Why is it that wasn't a one time thing but a reoccuring theme? The two parties can get away with putting crap candidates up for election because they've rigged the system so that the people won't ever get any other real choices.
Ralph Nader elected Bush.
Wallace elected Nixon.
Third party candidates are extremely harmful to their cause by taking votes away from the major party candidate closest overall to the third party candidate.
What you want is a runoff if noone gets to 50%. But that would take a constitutional amendment that would eliminate the electoral college.
Fat chance.http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=enComment
-
Ned, or he wants to abolish the electoral college.
Just to throw out my own opinion like everyone has always wanted to know:
I'm fine with a plurality. If Bush won by 40% to Kerry 39% and Nader 11%, I'd be fine with it (barring funnystuff in places like Florida.)
But I'm not fine if Kerry wins more of the popular vote but Bush manages to become President again, regardless of Nader's involvement.
HOWEVER, if Nader, Bush, or Kerry can't properly file to get on the ballot in any state, they shouldn't be allowed on it, no exceptions made. Just in the past week I've heard of Bush failing to get on in Alabama and Florida, but exceptions were made to extend deadlines. Why do we have deadlines in the first place if they're to be ignored?meet the new boss, same as the old bossComment
-
oooooh and the real reason why the Gallop polls shows Bush so far ahead: its "normalized" or weighted so that in ALL their national political polls 40% comes from Republicans and 33% percent comes from Democrats with the rest being independents. So bascially if they get the same number of Democratic and Republicans respondents in the poll they count the Republicans responces more.
This is BS.
In 1992 exit polls (ie the people who actually did vote) it was:
34% Democrats, 34% Republicans and 33%
and in '96:
39% Democrats, 34% Republicans, and 27% Independents
and in 2000
39% Democrats, 35% Republicans and 26% Independents in 2000.
And I won't go like Fezzy and scream bias (I think this is bad methodology on Gallups part not bias) but it is interesting to know that the CEO of Gallup is a GOP donor.
source:
Stop Quoting BenComment
-
Already been posted. And if the Gallup poll is so wrong, why are other polls like the CBS/NYT and the ABC/WaPo showing big leads for Bush, as well? You can criticize the methodology of Gallup all you want, but they don't seem to be the only ones using these kind of internals...
BTW, I'd love to see you try to call CBS/NYT and ABC/WaPo biased towards the GOP...
KH FOR OWNER!
ASHER FOR CEO!!
GUYNEMER FOR OT MOD!!!Comment
-
Yep. The same thing with the CBS poll."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
Comment