The Electoral College must go!

[JoeFaheyx]

I am not saying this in protest that Bush shouldn't have been elected for his second term. I am saying this because it takes away the purpose of voting. As an example, Al Gore had over half a million more votes than President Bush, this is what should make him president. I know that the reason is so candidates won't be campaigning in big cities, but if thats what they must do, than let them! It's not like the rest of the country is completely isolated. Democracy is a government run by the peoples' ideas, and majority. If the majority of people's ideas/beliefs fall under one candidate for president, than that person should be elected. Popular vote should decide the president....If nothing else, we will be able to get some more sleep on election night!

 

[phaxmohdem]

Amen

 

[Valvoline6]

I like the Electoral College and it's purpose. I am not in favor of changing it.

 

[EagleKeeper]

It's purpose is to prevent the high density states and urban areas from running roughshod over the little guy.

And it does it very well.

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: JoeFahey
I am not saying this in protest that Bush shouldn't have been elected for his second term. I am saying this because it takes away the purpose of voting. As an example, Al Gore had over half a million more votes than President Bush, this is what should make him president. I know that the reason is so candidates won't be campaigning in big cities, but if thats what they must do, than let them! It's not like the rest of the country is completely isolated. Democracy is a government run by the peoples' ideas, and majority. If the majority of people's ideas/beliefs fall under one candidate for president, than that person should be elected. Popular vote should decide the president....If nothing else, we will be able to get some more sleep on election night!

I'd bet that if you start taking away state's rights by getting rid of the electoral college, there will be a serious move towards secession.

It may sound like a good idea now, but how much food *can* you grow in California, Florida, and New York?

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: JoeFahey
I am not saying this in protest that Bush shouldn't have been elected for his second term. I am saying this because it takes away the purpose of voting. As an example, Al Gore had over half a million more votes than President Bush, this is what should make him president. I know that the reason is so candidates won't be campaigning in big cities, but if thats what they must do, than let them! It's not like the rest of the country is completely isolated. Democracy is a government run by the peoples' ideas, and majority. If the majority of people's ideas/beliefs fall under one candidate for president, than that person should be elected. Popular vote should decide the president....If nothing else, we will be able to get some more sleep on election night!

I'd bet that if you start taking away state's rights by getting rid of the electoral college, there will be a serious move towards secession.

It may sound like a good idea now, but how much food *can* you grow in California, Florida, and New York?

Uh.... California grows tons of food. What are you talking about?

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: TuxDave

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: JoeFahey
I am not saying this in protest that Bush shouldn't have been elected for his second term. I am saying this because it takes away the purpose of voting. As an example, Al Gore had over half a million more votes than President Bush, this is what should make him president. I know that the reason is so candidates won't be campaigning in big cities, but if thats what they must do, than let them! It's not like the rest of the country is completely isolated. Democracy is a government run by the peoples' ideas, and majority. If the majority of people's ideas/beliefs fall under one candidate for president, than that person should be elected. Popular vote should decide the president....If nothing else, we will be able to get some more sleep on election night!

I'd bet that if you start taking away state's rights by getting rid of the electoral college, there will be a serious move towards secession.

It may sound like a good idea now, but how much food *can* you grow in California, Florida, and New York?

Uh.... California grows tons of food. What are you talking about?

Uh... enough to support everyone else in Flordia and New York? If you believe that, you're silly.

Don't they get their water from other states, too?

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: TuxDave

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: JoeFahey
I am not saying this in protest that Bush shouldn't have been elected for his second term. I am saying this because it takes away the purpose of voting. As an example, Al Gore had over half a million more votes than President Bush, this is what should make him president. I know that the reason is so candidates won't be campaigning in big cities, but if thats what they must do, than let them! It's not like the rest of the country is completely isolated. Democracy is a government run by the peoples' ideas, and majority. If the majority of people's ideas/beliefs fall under one candidate for president, than that person should be elected. Popular vote should decide the president....If nothing else, we will be able to get some more sleep on election night!

I'd bet that if you start taking away state's rights by getting rid of the electoral college, there will be a serious move towards secession.

It may sound like a good idea now, but how much food *can* you grow in California, Florida, and New York?

Uh.... California grows tons of food. What are you talking about?

Uh... enough to support everyone else in Flordia and New York? If you believe that, you're silly.

Don't they get their water from other states, too?

New York and Florida will have to find their own food. I have no information regarding water import/exports though.

 

[shiner]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
It's purpose is to prevent the high density states and urban areas from running roughshod over the little guy.

And it does it very well.

 

[MiniDoom]

We don?t live in a democracy.

 

[JoeFaheyx]

We don't live in a democracy.

Hahaha

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: JoeFahey

We don't live in a democracy.

Hahaha

Well, we don't - we live in a republic. I'm not sure why there is so much confusion on this issue.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: rdubbz420
We live in a representative democracy.

Fixed that for you...

 

[MiniDoom]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: JoeFahey

We don't live in a democracy.

Hahaha

Well, we don't - we live in a republic. I'm not sure why there is so much confusion on this issue.

yup, Constitution-based federal republic.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: JoeFahey
I am not saying this in protest that Bush shouldn't have been elected for his second term. I am saying this because it takes away the purpose of voting. As an example, Al Gore had over half a million more votes than President Bush, this is what should make him president. I know that the reason is so candidates won't be campaigning in big cities, but if thats what they must do, than let them! It's not like the rest of the country is completely isolated. Democracy is a government run by the peoples' ideas, and majority. If the majority of people's ideas/beliefs fall under one candidate for president, than that person should be elected. Popular vote should decide the president....If nothing else, we will be able to get some more sleep on election night!

Bush won both, why is this an issue?

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: JoeFahey

We don't live in a democracy.

Hahaha

Well, we don't - we live in a republic. I'm not sure why there is so much confusion on this issue.

yup, Constitution-based federal republic.

Isn't amazing that people don't realize that we are closer to the EU than they think. We're more a band of 50 small countries that work together to solve things and share resources than one country.

 

[glugglug]

I agree - electoral college serves no purpose today (it did 200 years ago when communicating votes across the country was more of an issue). See us libs want the EC to go even when our candidate (officially) doesn't get the majority vote.

 

[Zebo]

Electorial college is not the problem. It defends against tyranny and population centralization.

The problem is electronic voting. Much fraud has already been perpetrated, much to come...

Look here for an in-depth education
http://www.wheresthepaper.org/links.html

 

[Valvoline6]

We can travel freely and we speak the same language (except for isolated areas). I don't think we're like Europe at all. I don't want to be like Europe either. If I did, I'd go there.

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Isn't amazing that people don't realize that we are closer to the EU than they think. We're more a band of 50 small countries that work together to solve things and share resources than one country.

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: glugglug
I agree - electoral college serves no purpose today (it did 200 years ago when communicating votes across the country was more of an issue). See us libs want the EC to go even when our candidate (officially) doesn't get the majority vote.

I don't understand how protecting state's rights serves no purpose.

Any benefit of communicating votes is solely a side effect, because that wasn't the purpose of it. Our forefathers actually had a lot of good foresight when they designed the system.

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: Valvoline6
We can travel freely and we speak the same language (except for isolated areas). I don't think we're like Europe at all. I don't want to be like Europe either. If I did, I'd go there.

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Isn't amazing that people don't realize that we are closer to the EU than they think. We're more a band of 50 small countries that work together to solve things and share resources than one country.

You can travel freely only because the states allow you to do so. There are still restrictions; for instance, there are states where you can't bring in livestock or produce.

 

[InfectedMushroom]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: TuxDave

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: JoeFahey
I am not saying this in protest that Bush shouldn't have been elected for his second term. I am saying this because it takes away the purpose of voting. As an example, Al Gore had over half a million more votes than President Bush, this is what should make him president. I know that the reason is so candidates won't be campaigning in big cities, but if thats what they must do, than let them! It's not like the rest of the country is completely isolated. Democracy is a government run by the peoples' ideas, and majority. If the majority of people's ideas/beliefs fall under one candidate for president, than that person should be elected. Popular vote should decide the president....If nothing else, we will be able to get some more sleep on election night!

I'd bet that if you start taking away state's rights by getting rid of the electoral college, there will be a serious move towards secession.

It may sound like a good idea now, but how much food *can* you grow in California, Florida, and New York?

Uh.... California grows tons of food. What are you talking about?

Uh... enough to support everyone else in Flordia and New York? If you believe that, you're silly.

Don't they get their water from other states, too?

uhhhh, you need to do a little reading and research. california grows enough food to feed half the population of the US.
southern california gets a lot of their water from northern califonia.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: JoeFahey

We don't live in a democracy.

Hahaha

Well, we don't - we live in a republic. I'm not sure why there is so much confusion on this issue.

yup, Constitution-based federal republic.

And I'm not sure why people like to quibble over definitions, a constitutional republic is a type of democracy. That it's not a "direct" democracy does'nt change that fact every branch of our government derives it's power from "majority rule" by definition is a democracy.

Edit BTW what nation deos'nt have a constitution? Just saying "republic" is fine adding "constitution" is frivolous along with "federal".

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: InfectedMushroom

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: TuxDave

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: JoeFahey
I am not saying this in protest that Bush shouldn't have been elected for his second term. I am saying this because it takes away the purpose of voting. As an example, Al Gore had over half a million more votes than President Bush, this is what should make him president. I know that the reason is so candidates won't be campaigning in big cities, but if thats what they must do, than let them! It's not like the rest of the country is completely isolated. Democracy is a government run by the peoples' ideas, and majority. If the majority of people's ideas/beliefs fall under one candidate for president, than that person should be elected. Popular vote should decide the president....If nothing else, we will be able to get some more sleep on election night!

I'd bet that if you start taking away state's rights by getting rid of the electoral college, there will be a serious move towards secession.

It may sound like a good idea now, but how much food *can* you grow in California, Florida, and New York?

Uh.... California grows tons of food. What are you talking about?

Uh... enough to support everyone else in Flordia and New York? If you believe that, you're silly.

Don't they get their water from other states, too?

uhhhh, you need to do a little reading and research. california grows enough food to feed half the population of the US.
southern california gets a lot of their water from northern califonia.

Really? They grow everything they need to live there? That's interesting. I guess they don't import any food, then, do they?

Southern Cal. gets a lot of their water from northern Cal., but not all of it - heck, they don't even get enough for their dams to help produce enough energy for the state.

Besides, nobody has figured out what to do for NY and FL. Or is California to go this on it's own?

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: glugglug
I agree - electoral college serves no purpose today (it did 200 years ago when communicating votes across the country was more of an issue). See us libs want the EC to go even when our candidate (officially) doesn't get the majority vote.

Not this lib...

Here is a separate question.

Is there something about the middle/southern US the DNC hates so much that they can't re-work strategies to secure these states?