European Hypocracy

[Kropotkin]

Ming: I'm the first to admit that I'm not an expert on the american consitution. I would be against that system myself as you are. As for the 'original' subject; I don't see Neds point of making other countries create federations and electoral colleges at all.

[Ming]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
well a referral to a situation USA was in the last elections... a close tie can happen in a state with the total amount of people in the country being 20 times or more higher a similar tie is much less likely to happen.

On the other hand... you have the State of Illinois. Here, Gore won. Even without all the typical ghost votes in Chicago, he would have won the state anyway.

But all those extra votes might have been the reason why Gore actually won the popular vote. What happened in Chicago happened in many of the other old city democratic machines. All of those votes add up, and could have also had a similar effect as to what you point out in Florida. Both systems have their problems

[Ming]

Originally posted by Kropotkin
As for the 'original' subject;

Oh... you mean European Hypocracy

You don't need to be an expert on the American Constitution to disagree with the Electorial College System. I was just pointing out that since it is system we are using, it is unfair to say that it is "corrupting" when what you really mean is that it provides different results than other methods of voting

[Kropotkin]

Yes, that was why I used " ". As a European hypocrite it's not always easy to find the right word.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Imran, I don't want to get into a discussion of our constitution, but if we are trying to spread "American" doctrine, what is it if its is not that? What we are is embodied in our constitution.

Then don't agree. But spreading the American doctrine is the idea of human rights, democratic republic, respect for basic freedoms of speech and religion. Our Constitution embodies those, but states do not have to accept the entirty of the Constitution to suscribe to the American doctrine.

But of course we believe in these things. We also believe in the protection of intellectual property set forth in the constitution. This has brought us the industry that makes us wealthy. But I don't see that on you list. Why?

A government of separaton of powers is another.

No, others don't have to adopt 100% of our constitution, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't advocate all of it (of course, adapted to the particular circumstances of the region).

What really bothers me, Imran, is guys like Carter going to Cuba and apologizing for the US not having an universal public health care system as does Cuba. Universal health care is not a core American value.

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by reds4ever
stuff

Answering stuff

more stuff

More answering stuff.

Sorry Ming, should have looked more closely.

Not sorry to this individual, however.

[Arrian]

Umm, Chris, did ya miss Ming's post about personal insults?

-Arrian

[Ming]

Chris... I don't care who started it.

NO MORE PERSONAL INSULTS... PERIOD!

[JohnIII]

That was an exclamation mark, O Merciless One.

[Chris 62]

Yikes, sorry Ming, I didn't see the warning.

My appologies.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by Ming


Both systems have their problems

Always true... but my opinion is that popular vote is what more people want - as the whole - therefore fairer in my eyes. (apart from the lesser chance for a tie, which is also an advantage)

[Kropotkin]

As the states are represented in other parts of the goverment (as for example 2 places in the senate regardless of size) it would for a poor and ignorant hippocrite like me seem that the states already have representation so and a popular vote for the president would seem well in order.

[Ming]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
Always true... but my opinion is that popular vote is what more people want - as the whole - therefore fairer in my eyes.

As a life long resident of Illinois, and an expert on Chicago politics... I laugh at the concept of a fairer vote.
In Chicago, dead people vote. The motto of the city...

Vote Early... Vote Often...

If the federal marshalls came into Chicago and other big Democratic Cities... it's very possible that they could prove that Bush actually won the popular vote in the last election

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by Ming


As a life long resident of Illinois, and an expert on Chicago politics... I laugh at the concept of a fairer vote.
In Chicago, dead people vote. The motto of the city...

Vote Early... Vote Often...

If the federal marshalls came into Chicago and other big Democratic Cities... it's very possible that they could prove that Bush actually won the popular vote in the last election

well that sounds an awful lot like corruption to me ...

"In Chicago, dead people vote. The motto of the city..."

I guess in Zimbabve dead vote too

[Arrian]

Chicago has a long and unfortunate history of shady elections. But somehow I doubt it's like the good 'ole days of Machine politics... if it was, wouldn't the Republicans be screaming bloody murder?

-Arrian