Posted on 06/16/2010 12:18:18 PM PDT by blog.Eyeblast.tv
In Port Chester N.Y., the old adage of “one man, one vote” has fallen by the wayside, at least for now. A new voting system has been put into place with the hopes of boosting Hispanic representation giving each resident 6 votes, as whites consistently win the trustee seats.
“That was very strange.”I’m not sure I liked it. All my life, I’ve heard, ‘one man, one vote”, Arthur Furano told the Associated Press after casting his vote. The federal government declared in 2006 that their at-large election system was unfair given their demographics and the actual outcomes.
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.eyeblast.tv ...
What the hell is happening to my country....I know, dumbass question.....
Words escape me. Backlash is coming...
The votes should be apportioned according to race.
White people should get three/fifths of a vote, based on their status as tax-slaves.
People of color should get six votes, and illegal immigrants should get 12 votes.
It's only fair.
Since people on welfare depend on the govt., shouldn’t they get 12 votes also?
I think this is so illegal. Isn’t anyone challenging it?
Why don’t they just say, you will have so and so Hispanic as your “choice”. Save time and effort.
Pray for our nation. But I am beginning to believe we are going to receive justice from the Lord, rather than the longsuffering and mercy that He has extended to us for so many years.
ACORN used to give them as many votes as they wanted, so yes, they are being discriminated against as well.
The good news is my new Tapco stocks came in for my sks’s along with 10 20 rnd clips, sorry what was the subject matter?
Unequal representation is outrages, no US citizen should sit quietly idle while we at the same time are being taxed to death!No taxation without representation was the cry 200 years ago, we must not forget and stand firm, this will not be tolerated today either!
I don't like the judge changing it, but this isn't what many people have accused it as giving more votes to Hispanics than any other group.
I have to disagree about the legality. I don’t like judges telling cities they have to have a certain type of ballot, but several cities vote that way. I remember in the city I used to live I voted for my 4 favorite candidates out of a smorgasbord of candidates for city council.
Thanks, but quit teasing.
Here in West Virginia we have multi member districts for our House of Delegates. The Democrats have been in a majority for 80 years in our state legislature, and by having 3 or 4 delegates from a district dilutes the few Republican votes out here.
When our election rolls around in November, I will get to vote for four delegates in my district. If I could vote for the same person four times, we might even get one Republican sent to the Legislature.
The better alternative is single-member districts (I believe WV is the last state to have multi-member districts). This would probably be the better answer for the election in question.
No. All voters, regardless of race, get 6 votes. Cumulative voting is perfectly legal, no matter what we think of it.
Per your tag line, i do all the time, i call him dad.
This is bizarre on so many levels.
a) If nearly half the town is Hispanic, wouldn’t a halfway decent Hispanic candidate do extremely well, under the old 1 vote per seat system? (Or when they say “Hispanic” do they mean “illegal”?) Of course, it could also be that most Hispanic voters are simply voting for the candidates they think are best, regardless of race, in which case their so-called “lack of representation” is not a problem at all.
b) Assuming minorities have inherently different interests than whites (and I reject that assumption), and want to maximize their political power, they would be much better off strongly influencing every seat, rather than concentrating their votes on one or two. I’d much rather have all 6 board members seeking my vote than have one or two who can take it for granted, and 4 or 5 who don’t need it.
c) This system would seems to lead to chaos and benefit entreched politicians, with strong political machines. It is tough enough to get people out to vote for Jones, Smith, Robinson, Johnson, Williams and Thompson. Imagine trying to organize some people into voting 3 votes for Thompson, 2 for Smith and 1 for Jones and another groups to cast two votes each for Williams, Robinson and Johnson.
More independent minded voters will not be able to allocate their votes as effectively as those who are influenced and directed by party operatives.
I am unconvinced this scheme is going to work the way the judge has in mind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.