I, too, think it goes without saying... - Page 2

**USN_Squid** · 11-03-2004, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pokerface

Ignorant? That's harsh.

A system put into place centuries ago because the uneducated couldn't be trusted to have a majority vote count (but were bright enough to know who the smart people were, so they could vote for them) is certainly one worthy of review in our modern times, I'd say.

Hell, if Afghanistan can have a majority vote put in a president, I'd like to think we could have that happen here, too.

We have nothing in common with Afhganistan politically. Our founding fathers devised a brilliant system to maintain States rights and provide them with a voice in a National Election. Going to a majority popular voting system would destroy the philosophy of freedom from tyranny of the majority. States with major cities would be the only majority voice and therefore "fly over" country would be even less significant than the Dems already think we are.

**leejo** · 11-03-2004, 03:21 PM

Given that this has happened 3 times in 200 years and somehow we've muddled through to becoming the world's superpower, I'd prefer that congress and the country devote resources to other matters.

**phyllis** · 11-03-2004, 07:40 PM

To the Bush fans...."You're welcome"

To the Kerry fans... "Sorry"

To all....God Bless America

**RandomGuy** · 11-03-2004, 09:10 PM

I am not American, but you caught my interest here:

Quote:

Originally Posted by USN_Squid

Our founding fathers devised a brilliant system to maintain States rights and provide them with a voice in a National Election. Going to a majority popular voting system would destroy the philosophy of freedom from tyranny of the majority. States with major cities would be the only majority voice and therefore "fly over" country would be even less significant than the Dems already think we are.

It seems that you are saying the vote of a New Yorker should be worth less because he lives closer to his neighbours, on average.
As for states' rights, there will inevitably be states whose citizens do not support, by majority, any given president. Shouldn't states' rights be defended legally and not politically? This was after a federal election, after all.
Also, please explain what you mean by "tyranny of the majority".

**CingularDuality** · 11-03-2004, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

It seems that you are saying the vote of a New Yorker should be worth less because he lives closer to his neighbours, on average.

Kinda. States get the same number of electoral votes as they have members of Congress. Since the House assigns reps based on population, sparsely populated states will have less electoral votes than densely populated states. The Senate, on the other hand, is designed to represent states regardless of population. This does give the small states a small advantage in the electoral college. Practically speaking, everyone's vote carries a similar weight in influencing the election.

Quote:

As for states' rights, there will inevitably be states whose citizens do not support, by majority, any given president. Shouldn't states' rights be defended legally and not politically? This was after a federal election, after all.

This is a matter of legality. Our legal system, and entire government for that matter, is based on our Constitution. The Constitution outlines very specifically how Presidents are chosen. Keep in mind that we are the United States of America, not the Federal Republic of America. There are certain rights that are specifically reserved for the states.

Quote:

Also, please explain what you mean by "tyranny of the majority".

Back to type of government: pure democracies have never succeeded. Our government is a representative democracy or a democratic republic. Pure democracy invites mob rule which has been proven to trample on the rights of minorities (and I'm not talking about the color of skin, necessarily).

**DudeMan** · 11-03-2004, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phyllis

To the Bush fans...."You're welcome"

To the Kerry fans... "Sorry"

To all....God Bless America

great decision.

**USN_Squid** · 11-04-2004, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eternal

I am making a t-shirt that says

"Hey....OHIO!
Thanks for F*&KING US!!!"

Since 1964 Ohio has voted 4 times for Dems and 6 times for Reps, and has always voted for the winner. (Or the winner has always had Ohio's vote). So, I guess they're always f*&king someone.

**leejo** · 11-04-2004, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eternal

I am making a t-shirt that says

"Hey....OHIO!
Thanks for F*&KING US!!!"

I think that is a FANTASTIC idea!

While you're implementing the new Democrat strategy of pissing off states whose electoral college votes you need, please don't forget to recognize these other states who went for Bush:

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
Colorado
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
North Carolina
North Dakota
Oklahoma
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virgina
West Virginia
Wyoming

11-03-2004, 03:21 PM	#17 (permalink)
leejo Join Date: Sep 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 7,839	Re: I, too, think it goes without saying... Given that this has happened 3 times in 200 years and somehow we've muddled through to becoming the world's superpower, I'd prefer that congress and the country devote resources to other matters.

11-03-2004, 07:40 PM	#18 (permalink)
phyllis Join Date: May 2003 Location: Dayton Ohio Age: 40 Posts: 1,502	Re: I, too, think it goes without saying... To the Bush fans...."You're welcome" To the Kerry fans... "Sorry" To all....God Bless America __________________

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links