The right to vote in America

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
You don't understand. For the nation as a whole the vote was within the uncertainty in the vote. I think I would suggest that you do some reading on statistics and uncertainty (this is different than a gambling course, what I am talking about is completely different, it has to do with measurements).

You are mistaken. I knew exactly what you were saying. You didn't understand what I was saying. The basis of who won has nothing to do with statistics or uncertaintity. Only the result counts not how accuratly the vote total represents the actual intent of each voter.

Gambling has EVERYTHING to do with it. All statistical analysis is based on odds. The runs of dice can be shown be within the statisticaly probable range and even to what degree or it can be used to see if loaded dice are in use. Its how casinos spot a cheating dealer or an off balance roulette wheel. Indeed two scientists from JPL once took the Cuban casinos to the cleaners via a statistical analysis of the roulete wheels there. That was when the casinos learned they needed to be more carefull with the balance on their wheels.

I remember seeing one of the guys on TV for something JPL was doing in the 70's but I can't remember his name or the specific mission where this was mentioned as he was the JPL spokesman on several missions.

BTW, I do not recall the actual uncertainty in that election (The election was almost 2 years ago), but I do remember that all estimates that I had heard (And any reasonable estimate) showed the issues that I stated (and I think that the level of uncertaintty was underestimated as shown in Florida).

Well if you don't know then you sure are certain for someone into uncertaintity.

You seem to be missing many of the basics of error analysis, if it matters to you, I would reccomend some study.

Jon Miller

You may do so if you wish but you entirely missed my point. The election results are based on actual counts and that is the way it should be. We can't hold a new election just because the level of uncertaintity exceeded the percentage of plurality.

Do you now understand the idea that I can understand uncertaintity without feeling that it should be considered in the election results? Bush won, period, based on the Electoral College, yet he did not get a plurality on actual counted votes, the only kind that matter. That they there is a degree of uncertaintity has nothing to do with the actual tabulated votes.

The Electoral College is a travesty and should go. Bush remains in the perfect postition to banish that monstrosity. He hasn't made the slightest effort.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by Ethelred


The Electoral College is a travesty and should go. Bush remains in the perfect postition to banish that monstrosity. He hasn't made the slightest effort.

Why is it a monstrosity? Without it the metro areas would run roughshod over rural people. It would be a tyranny of the urbanites. How is that fair at all? The electoral college is there for a reason.

[Ethelred]

How is it fair that someone from Montanna has more of a vote than I do?

That is some extremely specious thinking you are using to justify one part of the country getting more votes per person than another part. Its Goverment by the People, For the People and of the the People. Not goverment by the rural folks over the objections of the majority. Thats what the Senate is for and the Constitution as well.

You are trying to justify an unjust situation by claiming it is right for some to be more equal than others. Tell it to the pigs. Maybe they will agree with you.

[nationalist]

No, its so the urban folk don't totally over rule us. City dwellers don't represent the values of the country. Is it fair that becaue there are a whole bunch of people in LA, Garrett County Maryland shouldn't be able to shoot bears? No. The system is set up so that a tyrannical majority does not obtain power over a franchised minority. In the 20th cenury this translates to the fact that urban people do not have the right to determine how rural people should be governed. The president needs to be elected by both the urban and the rural. That is why the electoral college is just.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by nationalist
No, its so the urban folk don't totally over rule us.

No. You don't even have that right. It was because the City types that wrote the Constitution did not trust the average citizen. Including the rural types that few of them were.

City dwellers don't represent the values of the country.

The values of the country are those held by the majority and the majority lives in cities just as the majority of the framers of the Constitution did.

Is it fair that becaue there are a whole bunch of people in LA, Garrett County Maryland shouldn't be able to shoot bears? No.

Gosh that is so relevant to people in Maryland being more equal than people in California. The excuses for the Electoral Travesty are getting exceedingly lame.

The system is set up so that a tyrannical majority does not obtain power over a franchised minority. In the 20th cenury this translates to the fact that urban people do not have the right to determine how rural people should be governed. The president needs to be elected by both the urban and the rural. That is why the electoral college is just.

You don't have a single thing right except maybe the remark about bears. However the laws for hunting are state laws and have nothing to do with the President so its completely irrelevant.

You are still claiming that YOU are more equal than I simply because you are minority by choice and I live in California. That is un-American as can be. Equal rights under the law, that is an American principle and YOU are ignoring it.

[Al B. Sure!]

Nationalist:

but rural areas are disappearing so it won't mean jack soon. Big cities are appearing in the mid-west and south replacing farms and small towns.

[Dan Severn]

*Ahem*


Sic Semper tyrannus; live long the Loose Cannon Alliance

That should cover it.

[chequita guevara]

Farmers represent only 5% of the population. The a supermajority of Americans live in metropolitan areas. A majority of the country lives in ten states. Why should the other 40 states be able to dictate to the majority of Americans what the laws of the land shall be and how the president shall be?

[nationalist]

Ethelred,
you are ignorant of the founding principles of this country. We are a republic, not a democracy. The number of votes matter, but the placement of votes also matters. This is the basis of the electoral college. Our country was not designed in order for one special interest to dominate. That is not how our system works. This is not a popularity contest. Go into the rural area sometime folks, or at the very least download the electoral county by county map. Conservatives dominate most of our country.

You can put my example into state politics if you want. What right does Baltimore have to tell me that I can't shoot a bear that is threatening my family and my crops? It happens all the time. Bear hunting is illegal in MD, all because Balitmore doesn't want it. That is why I thank God that there is the electoral college. It protects people like me from being totally overrulled by cities. Why give the political power to places that are largely composed of immigrants? Take away the electoral college and you take away my freedom.

The Constitution was designed to prevent the tyranny of the majority. This is not designed for me to be more equal to you, it is design to prevent you from crushing me.

Speer- If we disappear, the country doesn't eat. How long will the country be around then? The rural people are not going to go away.

[Dan Severn]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Farmers represent only 5% of the population. The a supermajority of Americans live in metropolitan areas. A majority of the country lives in ten states. Why should the other 40 states be able to dictate to the majority of Americans what the laws of the land shall be and how the president shall be?

.

They can't. Why should Texas, New York, and California tell Minnesotans how to live their lives?

Personal liberty is something holy, not to be restrained. It is worth more than money, food, safety, or life. The government is to serve the people, not vice-versa. Ideally, there should be no external government at all. Sadly, there are men who would exploit such a situation, to enslave others for profit. Therefore it is necessary to have a system that maintains a credible defense, regulates trade, and gurantees liberty to all of its citizens. The purpose is not to change the way people live their lives, nor feed the people. Furthermore, just because more people live thousands of miles away, that does not mean that less populous areas are to be ruled by those in cities.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by nationalist
Ethelred,
you are ignorant of the founding principles of this country. We are a republic, not a democracy.

Rome was a Republic. We are a representive democracy. Do learn something about the writing of the Constitution.

The number of votes matter, but the placement of votes also matters. This is the basis of the electoral college. Our country was not designed in order for one special interest to dominate. That is not how our system works. This is not a popularity contest.

If it isn't then its not a legitmate vote. A popularity contest or at least a plurality contest is EXACTLY what every other office in the US is. Only the President is elected in this strange way.

Go into the rural area sometime folks, or at the very least download the electoral county by county map. Conservatives dominate most of our country.

Whats the number of consevatives in a minority area have to do with them dominating the country? They don't. They barely got their man in office this time. Domination is when Reagan won most of the states. Domination is when Lyndon Johnson won most of the states.

You can put my example into state politics if you want. What right does Baltimore have to tell me that I can't shoot a bear that is threatening my family and my crops?

Again I ask what does that have to do with the Electoral Abomination? You still haven't answered.

It happens all the time. Bear hunting is illegal in MD, all because Balitmore doesn't want it. That is why I thank God that there is the electoral college.

We have the Electoral Insane Asylum and you can't wang away at bears anyway. Clearly it doesn't do what you want it too. Most likely bear hunting is ilegal for conservation reasons. If it had become ilegal in California early enough the Golden Bear on the California State flag would still exist. The last one was shot in the early 1900's before conservationism took hold in the state.

It protects people like me from being totally overrulled by cities. Why give the political power to places that are largely composed of immigrants?

Why give some cracker more of a vote than I have. You are still advocating that you should be more important than I am. You are still being un-American.

Take away the electoral college and you take away my freedom.

Is that the freedom to arm bears. You allready aren't allowed to shoot them. What a crock. Your freedom is not dependent on oppressing me buy have a greater say in who becomes the President than I do.

The Constitution was designed to prevent the tyranny of the majority. This is not designed for me to be more equal to you, it is design to prevent you from crushing me.

Thats in the Constitution and the Electoral College NEVER had anything to do with it. You are just defending an outmoded institution because you want to shoot bears from what I can see and that remains a state issue.

Why do you want to shoot bears anyway? Were you attacked by one? Do you want to a case of trichonosis? If so you can try badly cooked pork just as well as bear.

Speer- If we disappear, the country doesn't eat. How long will the country be around then? The rural people are not going to go away.

I have news for you. Most the food in the US is produced on corporate farms that are owned by large companies and run by city folks. We are down to one person in fity working on farms in the US last I heard. It might be lower now.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by Ethelred


Rome was a Republic. We are a representive democracy. Do learn something about the writing of the Constitution.

Sorry, this is a Republic. Democracy was distrusted by our founding fathers. I reiterate, study the foundation of our country.

If it isn't then its not a legitmate vote. A popularity contest or at least a plurality contest is EXACTLY what every other office in the US is. Only the President is elected in this strange way.

That is because the President is the only nation wide elected office. Originally, the only federal popularly elected officicial was the Representative. It can be a popularity contest, because everyone in a rep's district is theoretically feeling the same social situations. The president is different because the Pres represents a wider spectrum of people. That is the reason for the populist safeguards.

Whats the number of consevatives in a minority area have to do with them dominating the country? They don't. They barely got their man in office this time. Domination is when Reagan won most of the states. Domination is when Lyndon Johnson won most of the states.

This isn't about dominating a country, this is about keeping a prescense in the executive branch. If there were no lectoral college, the people of LA could outweigh the entire population of states. If you study your history, the rights of states supercede the rights of populous cities. State sovereignty led to the comprimise. That is why the Senate has 100 members. The states are sovereign to a degree. Believe it or not, Delaware matters.

Again I ask what does that have to do with the Electoral Abomination? You still haven't answered.

We have the Electoral Insane Asylum and you can't wang away at bears anyway. Clearly it doesn't do what you want it too. Most likely bear hunting is ilegal for conservation reasons. If it had become ilegal in California early enough the Golden Bear on the California State flag would still exist. The last one was shot in the early 1900's before conservationism took hold in the state.

The Golden Bear example doesn't matter at all, and we both know it. The point that I am trying to get accross is that if there is no safe guard, the population centers can dominate policies,even if they don't understand what they are voting against. That is what I am talking about. Baltimore doesn't have a bear problem. We do. The only reason we can't act is because Balitmore outweighs us in the state. It says how we can deal with our problem, even if it doesn't effect them at all. They don't want to do something, so we are forbidden to act, even though it doesn't effect them. That is not right. That is the type of problem the electoral college prevents against.

Why give some cracker more of a vote than I have. You are still advocating that you should be more important than I am. You are still being un-American.

I am advocating that my soveriegn state should be the equal of your sovereign state. That is certainly not un-American. I reiterate, study your history. This is not a democracy, it is a Republic.

Why do you want to shoot bears anyway? Were you attacked by one?

Yes I was, as a matter of fact. It happened while I was jogging. I was 150 yards from my house when I was atacked. I accidently came between a mother and her cubs while she was crossing a road. What do you have to say about that? Have you had a 450 pound wild animal attack you? I have. Luckily my neighbor was home and had a rifle, or I might not be able to type this. Idiot.

I have news for you. Most the food in the US is produced on corporate farms that are owned by large companies and run by city folks. We are down to one person in fity working on farms in the US last I heard. It might be lower now.

I have news for you, even corporate farmers need land to grow things. Even corporate farmers need to protect agricultural rights. Even rural people deserve representation. You are the people that we need protection from. You are the reason that the electoral college was created in the first place.

[Dan Severn]

While everyone's pointing fingers...

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by nationalist

Sorry, this is a Republic. Democracy was distrusted by our founding fathers. I reiterate, study the foundation of our country.

I have. Thats why I stopped calling the US a republic since it really isn't one. There ARE NO full fledged democracies in the world. All of them are representitive democracies.

The president is different because the Pres represents a wider spectrum of people. That is the reason for the populist safeguards.

Exactly what I said was the reason for the Electoral College in the first place. Its not needed anymore. Americans are generally better educated now and the country is no longer run by an small group of well educated elite individuals with paranoia about the Great Unwashed.

This isn't about dominating a country, this is about keeping a prescense in the executive branch. If there were no lectoral college, the people of LA could outweigh the entire population of states. If you study your history, the rights of states supercede the rights of populous cities. State sovereignty led to the comprimise. That is why the Senate has 100 members. The states are sovereign to a degree. Believe it or not, Delaware matters.

The Senate allready does that job. There is no need for it in the case of the President and in fact the States ARE NOT sovereign now and only one ever was. Thats Texas. The founding colonies went from being colonies to being part of a nation almost at the same time. All other states have never even remotely been sovereign.

Sure the peope of Delaware matter but I see no reason why someone living in Delaware should be more equal than I am. You sure have not given a convincing reason for this sort of oppresion of a majority by a minority.

Neither LA nor Delaware are people. I do not put artificial entities over real live people. Neither the city of LA nor the State of Deleware has any right to vote in a nation with goverment by the people.

Again I ask what does that have to do with the Electoral Abomination? You still haven't answered.

That was something I said. Be more carefull with your quotes. You still haven't given a good reason why a state should have a vote in a nation founded on the principle that the state is beholden to the people and not the other way around.

Baltimore doesn't have a bear problem. We do. The only reason we can't act is because Balitmore outweighs us in the state. It says how we can deal with our problem, even if it doesn't effect them at all. They don't want to do something, so we are forbidden to act, even though it doesn't effect them. That is not right. That is the type of problem the electoral college prevents against.

As I pointed out before it didn't prevent your problem. So where is the reason for the Electoral Travesty? The people of Baltimore have just as much right to decide what happens in the state as you do but you want to deny them that right. If the majority doesn't rule that leaves a minority in power. Just as we have with Bush right now.

You are complaining about a purely state problem and the answer to the problem is for those that want to shoot bears to do a better job of politicking.

I am advocating that my soveriegn state should be the equal of your sovereign state. That is certainly not un-American. I reiterate, study your history. This is not a democracy, it is a Republic.

My state was never sovereign. My state has no right to vote for me except as an elected represented OF ME not the state itself. I reiterate this IS a representative democracy and not a Republic. Calling it one does not make it one.

Yes I was, as a matter of fact. It happened while I was jogging. I was 150 yards from my house when I was atacked. I accidently came between a mother and her cubs while she was crossing a road. What do you have to say about that? Have you had a 450 pound wild animal attack you? I have. Luckily my neighbor was home and had a rifle, or I might not be able to type this. Idiot.

I am not the IDIOT that got between a bear and her cubs. I did have a bear steal my food on backbacking trip. I had the good sense to stay away from it. Actually I went back to sleep because I was exhausted. Shooting a bear under those conditions is legal I suspect. Your conditions that is, not mine. I was in a National Park and having a gun there is ilegal.

Go piss up a rope if you are going to call me names. I allready am aware that you think you are somehow special and deserving of more of a vote than I am and didn't call YOU names despite that.

I have news for you, even corporate farmers need land to grow things. Even corporate farmers need to protect agricultural rights. Even rural people deserve representation. You are the people that we need protection from. You are the reason that the electoral college was created in the first place.

Actualy you are the people the Elitests (this is not intended as an insult, they were elite and they knew it) that put the constitution together were afraid of. You have representation, you just want to have more than I have. I see no reason why someone that calls me an idiot for not knowing everything about your personal history should have more say than I do.

Next time get the heck out of the way of the bear. It was just trying to protects its cubs and now its dead. I know to stay away from bears what was your problem?

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Dan Severn
While everyone's pointing fingers...

I allready have stolen your GIF for my collection of animated gifs. Thank you for giving me another oportunity though.