Our Coming Electoral Train Wrecks

Tech Central Station ^ | 10/22/2004 | William J. Stuntz

[joesnuffy]

If it isnt close they cant cheat enough to win...though they sure are trying hard this time out...

Their attitude is that a loss means they just didnt cheat hard enough...not that they are wrong
or that the American people have a right to choose who they want for leaders..

Democrats are in fact the exact opposite of what they claim to stand for...

imo

[farmfriend]

Ever read Carter's book Turning Point? It's about his first election to state office. He lost but they found so much voter fraud that the election was over turned and he was installed in office. Because of this they passed a law that you could no longer vote if you had been dead more than 3 years. True story.

[randita]

There will be Liberal America and Conservative America, the latter of which will prevail increasingly for demographic reasons.

Liberal's power base and structure has declined with every election cycle for at least the past decade, both on the federal and state levels. Some people get it, like Zell Miller and John Breaux, e.g., but most liberals are in denial. Their undying allegiance to Clinton in the 90's and their hatred for Bush now has blinded them to reality. I have been waiting for many years for there to be a civil war in the Democrat Party and for someone of a moderate bent with at least a shred of integrity to rise from the ashes, but the Clintons have too much of a stranglehold on the party fundraising machine to allow that to happen.

If Kerry loses, the vitriol will be even more palpable. There may actually be some finger pointing among Democrats, but in the end, they'll continue to worship at the feet of the almightly Clintons. Hillary will be practically anointed for 2008 and she will lose badly to whomever the Republicans put up. Maybe then, the Clintons will ride off into the sunset or better for us, they'll continue to sink the Democrat Party further depths.

[The Loan Arranger]

A Modest Proposal: Instead of changing the Electoral College, let's change who gets to vote, and how much that vote is worth. For example; If you are a military (active or reserve-honorable or general discharge)veteran, you get one vote, if you are a non-veteran, but pay income or property taxes (and can prove it), you get half a vote, should you not qualify under either category, yet you still wish to vote, you may perform supervised community service for six months, to qualify for a quarter of a vote.

[valkyrieanne]

The electoral college keeps the more populous states from unduly influencing the election. It damps out the effect of fraud. It is truly an example of *representative republicanism.* That's why the only whiners you hear complaining about it are Democrats.

[dufekin]

There are several ultimate possibilities. Because liberal power decreases as liberals (1) fail to convert conservatives to their ideology; (2) fail to procreate and rear new liberals due to their pro-death platform; and (3) sometimes jump to the conservative side when they become successful enough to pay taxes, the Liberal America will either:

(A) like the Federalists after the election of 1800, retreat to their Northeast and Left-Coast redoubt and put up a nasty temper tantrum but eventually dissipate;

(B) like the Dixiecrats after the election of 1860, separate into one (or perhaps two) independent nations in open rebellion. Considering the open and serial traitor of their candidate, this possibility should not be considered fanciful.

(C) like the Democrats after the election of 1896, recognize their errors, panic, wait for a Republican schism , and then adopt their platform en toto and ride it all the way to the ballot box.

(D) like the Republicans after the election of 1932, await an opposition disaster and capitalize by adopting a newfound ideology and winning converts.

[farmfriend]

The electoral college keeps the more populous states from unduly influencing the election.

That was my argument when I got California State Grange policy changed. I said I didn't want NY, LA, and SF electing my President every time.

[beckysueb]

In the dingbat cave, they asked the question if Bush won the popular vote and Kerry won the electoral vote, who would be the president. Now keep in mind, these are the same people who say Bush stole the election because Gore got the popular vote. Yep, in their small minds, they said why of course Kerry would be president if he won the electoral votes. One brave dingbat said wouldn't that be kind of hypocrytical beings they had always called Bush illegitimate. But they said well payback is hell.

[beckysueb]

Yep. Too much room for someone to with hold their electoral vote like that one woman did in 2000.

[beckysueb]

I second that motion!

[MeekOneGOP]

How algore almost stole an election .....

Bug-eyed Chad Search

[beckysueb]

Sounds good to me. People who are brain dead or physically dead shouldn't have a vote. Neither should family pets, IMHO.

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

Not to mention Clinton, with 42% in 1992.

Gosh, I keep forgetting to send a thank-you note to Ross Perot for giving us Clinton...

[beckysueb]

Hmmmmm. Looks like a Gore vote to me.

[MeekOneGOP]

:^)

[Paleo Conservative]

I think the good professor forgot that clinton also was opposed by a majority of the American citizens.

Twice!

[Paleo Conservative]

I was discussing this subject with a Russian a few days ago and she said, "I really wish we had the electoral voting like the U.S. because all the elections are governed by the voters in Moscow.

Exactly. The only other countries I know about that have direct election of the presdent, also have very centralized governments. Look at Mexico, Venezuela, and France. About a quarter of the entire population of Mexico lives in Mexico City. You know why? Most of the infrastructure improvements and industrial investments are made the instead of being spread around the country. Notice where most Summer Olympic games are held. They are mostly held in a nation's capitol which is usually the largest and richest city in that country too. In the 108 years since the first modern olympics were held, the US has hosted them four times (St. Louis 1904, Los Angeles 1932 and 1984, Atlanta 1996). None of those times has it been held in Washington DC! I think that is mainly due to the fact that for most things like culture and economics, the nation's capitol is not really the most important city. The fact that no one region can control and dominate the US means laws and policy can not be tilted too heavily in favor of one region or city.

[JoJo Gunn]

To this day Ole Bug Eyes still tickles me.

[MeekOneGOP]

hahaaaa! Yeah, I chuckle at that one, too! :^D

[staytrue]

We need to change the system, and soon.

No way in hell should we change the system. Right now you must win in the swing (moderate) states. Under a popular vote system, your goal will be to gin up your base. The coasts will be calling the south ignorant yahoos. The south will be calling the coasts panty waste liberals.

Now Kerry says, he won't be liberal but will be bush only better, while bush says he will be conservative, but compassionate.

With the popular vote, they will be calling each other asses and quite frankly, we could get into a shooting civil war.