Did you cast your electrical vote?

[IBhacknU]

I was just telling my wife that Bush was leading in the popular vote, but he's about tied for the electoral vote.
She says, "Electric votes, how come you didn't tell me I could vote online?"

 

[zippy]

Are you inviting me to insult your wife?

I'll wait for confirmation before I dare.

 

[Wipeout667]

That's just sad.

 

[IBhacknU]

Fire away.

I am just happy she voted.

 

[yakko]

What is sad? The fact that she does not know what the electoral votes are or the fact that popular vote doesn't mean sh!t.

 

[Wipeout667]

The fact that she doesn't know about electoral votes.

From "The Onion":
Leo: (July 23--Aug. 22)
Your carefully considered, issues-based presidential vote will be negated by a hairdresser who likes the other guy's ties.

 

[Russ]

I just heard something I didn't know. Apparently, an Electoral College member can cast their vote for whomever they please, and disregard the state election results. Does anybody know if this is true?

Russ, NCNE

 

[IBhacknU]

yes, I've heard this too Russ. I beleive it is true.

Also, thanks yakko for backing up my wife. Just don't get too close

 

[perry]

Yup, it's true. But very rare that an electoral college member will do that. They are usually members of the state's party (they are not necessarily the Congressmen/Senators). If it does end up in a tie today, that could change when the elctoral college members cast their votes in a month or so. Probably won't happen, but it could.

Today's results mean nothing until the members actually cast their votes.

 

[zippy]

Russ, that is true.

If nobody in the US voted, we would still have a new president. If everyone voted for one candidate in a state, the electoral votes for that state could still go to one of the other candidates.

However, no state has ever crossed it's popular vote. Yet.

 

[dc]

yeah, it's true. sad.

the voting system sucks.

 

[jmcoreymv]

The funny thing is that I learned today why we have an electoral college. It comes from the Legislative Assembly (I think) in the 1790's of France. The government was pretty much all based on middle class values and they didnt want to give universal manhood suffrage, so they let the working class vote, and the middle class could just override the vote.

 

[IBhacknU]

Things have changed a lot between now and the 1700's. I would guess people are better educated, and better informed.

Just because things were always done that way, doesn't mean it the best way.

 

[sciencewhiz]

Russ,

Electors generally take an oath to vote for the canidate. I about 2/3 of the states, there are penalties for not voting the right way. Here in california. the is up to $1000 fine and up to 3 years in jail.