Main > Everything Else
1000 Reasons not to vote for GW
fredster:
DynaGod,
I guess by "friggin farce" you disagree with it.
It has been debated for 100 years. The reason is to prevent large population centers controlling politics for the rest of the states.
It's brilliant, like the rest of the constitution.
How can you even think it could be corrupted. It was designed to keep corruption out of the system and balance it out.
Didn't you pass "government" in HS? It was a well thought out way to keep all of the people treated fairly.
We only hear this clap trap when Liberals lose.
DYNAGOD:
--- Quote ---The reason is to prevent large population centers controlling politics for the rest of the states.
--- End quote ---
ummm, do you realize what you are even saying?
we are all Americans! how can you balance out an absolute majority?
So,
in a classroom full of 50 kids..
if 15 of them vote for oranges,and 35 vote for apples.
everyone should get oranges becuase the 15 who voted for them were fatter than the 35 who voted for apples..
thats absurd!!
everyone vote should be equal..and not squelched by the imaginary geographic boundaries and demographic size of their state.im personally offended to think that the elctoral college system lessens the importance of my vote over that of someone in another state..
and NO...since you must know.. we didnt have goverment in my JH or HS school cause there were no books to be had. we had to share ancient out of date books with two other schools in the city and we rotated them by semester..
i went to one of the poorest,underfunded public school systems in america in the eighties.. but somehow i managed to become a design engineer despite all that..and my education has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with a flawed misinterpretation of the constitution..whats right is right and whats wrong is wrong..
even a dog knows not to eat his own balls..
spocktwin:
;D Dynagod it sounds even though you had a bad situation to start out that you did learn something. I think you need to study the electoral college setup. It really is a thing of brillance for all the reasons fredster pointed out in his post. Take a deep breath, think about it and you will find the thinking behind it. At first blush is does seem kind of wrong but if you look at all the nuances it does make sense........just my two cents!
DYNAGOD:
im not upset at all,im just full of conviction :P
looking at fredsters post illluminates nothing for me..
--- Quote --- The electoral college is designed to offset the urban or highly populace areas from the rest of the country.
--- End quote ---
Why?
during an election there should be no boundaries, no borders and no segregation..for that one day the voices of all americans are to be heard,tallied and the majority spoken for... breaking it down by states and cities is fine for statistical analysis, but above and beyond that it has no merit and should certainly have no effect on the outcome of an election.
he elaborated by using the following example.
--- Quote ---If a president won only by the popular vote, he would only have to campaign in about 1/3 of the country and appeal to them. The rest of the country's vote would be worthless.
--- End quote ---
if a president won by the popular vote your saying that only states with the largest population would be on the campaign trail during the next election period becuase those states alone apparently have the greatest number of popular votes.. and just how does that differ form the electoral system with its "swing" states. it simply strips the individual of his vote..its the same vice with a different name.
and to say that the rest of the peoples votes would be worthless is a mighty bold statement.
now,somehwat contradictory to the first stement..
--- Quote ---Fla had 25 electorial votes. It takes what, about 270 to win the presidency. 25 is almost 10% of the way.
--- End quote ---
if floridas population still controls 10% of the vote even under the electoral system ,then obviously they are still going to pander to that state..
so theres fundamentally no difference...
other than to make the votes of the individual mute.
your actually giving states with larger populations MORE influence,not less..as the system is meant to do..
its fundamentally flawed..
no single state should be the swing..a single vote should..
spocktwin:
But as you can find in some elections the winner did not necessarily have all the big states but a collection of the smaller ones. We all want to believe as Americans that we are all the same but we are not. The wants and need of a farming family in Iowa can be very different then that of a inner city family or for that matter different then rural Ohio (a swing state). We all need to make sure that our states are equally represented.
Some of our larger cities have more population then some entire states,,,,,,should policy be dictated by the needs of the bigger cities, no! Policy needs to be implemented for the good of all.
I don't mean this to sound like a slam down but you have a very limited view of the popular vote and you are not seeing the forest because of the trees.