Electoral College

[Foo]

Does this antiquated system of electing our president still work? Or more importantly, does it work in the manner in which it was intended?

I have a problem with a system that can totally disregard what the majority of America wants. In 2000, almost 500,000 more people voted for Al Gore, yet George Bush was elected.

I think what disturbs me most is this: If a state has a total of 10 electoral votes to give and the race in that state is a landslide victory, say 80% to one candidate, shouldn't that candidate get just 8 of the electoral votes, not all 10? This is particualarly disturbing when a state is decided by less than 1% in the election, yet the candidate receives all of that states electoral votes.

The worst part of this is, if you are a traditionally partisan state (like West Virginia) candidates won't even bother campaigning there. They don't care about their issues, or the fact that millions of people in that state are registered voters. Because the always vote GOP, the repiblican takes them for granted, and the democrat doesn't evn try to influence them.

[ISUsycamore81]

Yeah, the electoral college is bullshit. That is the reason I'm not voting this year. Indiana is traditionally republican and Bush won Indiana in 2000. So, my vote is basically wasted. There needs to be an amendment so we can do away with the E.C. it is horribly outdated and useless to us now.

[WarrenPeace]

ISU, you dick ;D. I can't believe your not voting. If I'd known this earlier I would have given you all these links to show what you can do to promote a third party in your state. i've been reading some sites with suggestions and stuff. but its kinda late now anyhow.

but I'll be pretty happy once this campaign process is over. living in a "battleground" state I'm constantly bombarded with phone calls, getting mail, and seeing negative toned commercials on t.v. just 2 more days. Tuesday can't come soon enough.

[eminem4569]

Ashley Simpson would make a better Prez than Bush. Fuck Bush and fuck the fact the Electoral College and judges got him into office.

Eat Bush
Suck Dick
2004

[ouchyfreddy]

not voting does nothing ISU. in fact it doenst help kerry in any way. and you never know..indiana could have there minds changed since we ahve been to war with iraq and are in massive amounts of debt.

[Sharp]

I'm not voting either ISU, so don't feel bad.

There is a principle that I believe in that if you don't like either candidate, then you shouldn't vote. Why feel responsible for putting someone in office you don't like just because he's slightly more tolerable than the other?

I dislike Bush completely. He has screwed America over royally and there is no way you can claim that he will do a better job in another term. Near record high unemployment rates, tax cuts for the rich (damn Republicans), and this bullshit war in Iraq should be enough to set his feet in a cement bucket and toss him off the dock.

I will honest and say that I would rather see Kerry make it into office than Bush, but that's not saying much. If I went ahead and voted for Kerry, who I distrust, and he ended up screwing this country over just like Bush or worse, then I would just end up kicking myself in the ass.

I'm just going to let the rest of America squabble over which asshole gets the chair. Yet I will still complain, even though I didn't vote. I will still claim that right.
Because I was given poor choices and the poor choices are in reflection of a poor society.

Remember. Our government is just a representitive of our society. If the government isn't doing it's job, a big part of the reason is because of where the American society has put itself.

[Sharp]

"Like other tyrannies, the tyranny of the majority was at first, and is still vulgarly, held in dread, chiefly as operating through the acts of the public authorities. But reflecting persons perceived that when society is itself the tyrant -- society collectively over the seperate individuals who compose it -- its means of tyrannizing are not restricted to the acts which it may do by the hands of its political functionaries. Society can and does execute its own mandates; and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with which it ought not to meddle, it practices a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression; since, though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself. Protection, therefore, against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough: there needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling; against the tendency of society to impose, by other means than civil penalties, its own ideas and practices as rules of conduct on those who dissent from them; to fetter the development, and, if possible, prevent the formation, of any individuality not in harmony with its ways, and to compel all characters to fashion themselves upon the model of its own."
- John Stuart Mill

[ISUsycamore81]

ouchyfreddy said:

not voting does nothing ISU. in fact it doenst help kerry in any way. and you never know..indiana could have there minds changed since we ahve been to war with iraq and are in massive amounts of debt.

Trust me, it's already predetermined that Bush will take Indiana. I hate this fucking state.

[ouchyfreddy]

i think bush might be taking illinois too
even though we are known for democrats. it seems like there are a lot of farmer hillbillies in my stat that think they are from texas so they want bush

[WarrenPeace]

Guest-Sharp said:

I'm not voting either ISU, so don't feel bad.

There is a principle that I believe in that if you don't like either candidate, then you shouldn't vote. Why feel responsible for putting someone in office you don't like just because he's slightly more tolerable than the other?

I dislike Bush completely. He has screwed America over royally and there is no way you can claim that he will do a better job in another term. Near record high unemployment rates, tax cuts for the rich (damn Republicans), and this bullshit war in Iraq should be enough to set his feet in a cement bucket and toss him off the dock.

I will honest and say that I would rather see Kerry make it into office than Bush, but that's not saying much. If I went ahead and voted for Kerry, who I distrust, and he ended up screwing this country over just like Bush or worse, then I would just end up kicking myself in the ass.

I'm just going to let the rest of America squabble over which asshole gets the chair. Yet I will still complain, even though I didn't vote. I will still claim that right.
Because I was given poor choices and the poor choices are in reflection of a poor society.

Remember. Our government is just a representitive of our society. If the government isn't doing it's job, a big part of the reason is because of where the American society has put itself.

I find it rather unfortunate that you don't vote. I feel that John Kerry isn't our savior, but another 4 years of G Dub is our worst nightmare. Honestly, I feel that if the country actually did some research they'd know that Ralph Nader is whats best for this country. I can guarantee you that if you took what Kerry and Bush have done for the average citizen then it wouldn't equal half of what Nader has accomplished. But alas, I have to follow the heard and vote Kerry because of my complete distaste for the failure in office. Its impossible to do worse than him.

But let me tell you about in 2002 when I voted. When it came time to vote for my governor I voted for a guy named Ken Pentl. Ken Pentl only had an outside chance, and a far outside chance at that, of winning the Governor vacancy. I voted for him because he was a Green Party candidate. I knew I wasn't going to vote for the red or blue candidate. I knew Pentl wasn't going to win. I placed my vote to make a statement that I'm not binded by the two party "corporate" system. There's more than 2 parties out there, people just need to open their mind. So with that, I think even though I voted for Kerry it was because I've never had a more disliking of the current administration than I've ever had in my life. I'll continue to consider voting for a so-called "3rd party" first and foremost for the rest of my voting experiences.

[Sharp]

Well it is true that there are more choices that just the major two (red and blue). But in the end it usually ends up with the Republicans and Democrats overshadowing every other party no matter what their merits are.

So it's down to the wire. Bush and Kerry. Every other vote would be, for the most part, wasted on the tag alongs in the race.

But in the end...I did end up voting. Not because I changed my mind, but because I dislike Bush that much.

The principles I stated, I still stand by firmly.

If you have poor choices, then why settle?
One of the greatest powers that is given is the right to vote. But with that power also comes the right to not vote if you chose. No where does it state that you have to vote. So the choice is yours and yours alone, and it is in every mans right to make his own.

I DO NOT believe in the statement "If you don't vote, don't complain". I don't like any of my choices, so I will probably end up complaining either way, voting or not.
Unless Kerry is elected comes through in the end...but that has yet to be seen...

[T101]

Foo said:

Does this antiquated system of electing our president still work? Or more importantly, does it work in the manner in which it was intended?

I have a problem with a system that can totally disregard what the majority of America wants. In 2000, almost 500,000 more people voted for Al Gore, yet George Bush was elected.

I think what disturbs me most is this: If a state has a total of 10 electoral votes to give and the race in that state is a landslide victory, say 80% to one candidate, shouldn't that candidate get just 8 of the electoral votes, not all 10? This is particualarly disturbing when a state is decided by less than 1% in the election, yet the candidate receives all of that states electoral votes.

The worst part of this is, if you are a traditionally partisan state (like West Virginia) candidates won't even bother campaigning there. They don't care about their issues, or the fact that millions of people in that state are registered voters. Because the always vote GOP, the repiblican takes them for granted, and the democrat doesn't evn try to influence them.

The Electoral College is outdated. That's why there is talk of disbanding it. I think it should stay with the popular vote.

[WarrenPeace]

T101 said:

The Electoral College is outdated. That's why there is talk of disbanding it. I think it should stay with the popular vote.

I don't think I'd like an all out popular vote. If thats how it worked then I'm sure the only states that would get visits from candidates would be California, New York, Texas, and maybe Florida and Pennslyvania. States like mine (MN) wouldn't be able to hear the candidates speak because we have a fairly small population. but we do have a decent amount of electoral votes (10).

Personally, I think those 2 states (can't remember which ones) are on the right path when they have the option to split their electoral votes instead of giving all of them to a particular candidate.