m'eh. I'm cool with it. My hope is that this allows the small 'l' libertarians, or western republicans to take the party from the religious right.
I just can't vote for someone who speaks down to me, especially when I am smarter than they are.
Go third party and send a message.
First, the popular vote argument is meaningless for several reasons. Second, the electoral votes are not still questionable, and have not been for years.
Fred Thompson - He went back to acting.
If, if, if jarod. When you count the votes per the Florida law in effect at the time of the election, Bush wins. No ifs ands or buts - finis!
Psychic determination and guesswork is no way to run an election. There is more than one way to dimple a chad than an attempt to vote. Pretending that a dimpled chad is a clear indication of voting intent is patently ridiculous. One could see somebody almost deciding then, at the last second deciding against the vote, there is a dimpled chad...
Heck no. The founders knew that there would be times when the popular v electoral were different. They put it in this way because they knew that over time some states would overwhelm others in population and could overpower every election. This gives weight to the larger states but allows the less populated states to also have a strong say.
There was a ruling on "clear intent" how people interpret that is very different. I have clearly shown how one could not tell by a dimple who they wanted to vote for, there are simply too many scenarios where a chad could get dimpled without such intent.
No, the electoral college gives an uneven advantage to the minority. Much of the design of governmet was in place to prevent, or at least slow down, the ability of the majority to have a free rein without regard to the minority. In a view of the US by counties and population, the straight popular vote would concentrate all the power on the coasts in a little over 500 counties. Candidates would concentrate there and, for the most part, ignore the rest of the country. Effectively, the 'fly-over country' would have no representation given the there are no more state's rights - the direct election of Senators eliminated the states power to counterweight the Federal government. The popular vote would require a change to the Constitutoin because that document gives the states the power to choose their electors in the electoral college. The states have seen fit to do that by a vote of the populace.
Correct, there was no law in place which deemed pregnant and dimpled chads as being a vote; however, statutes that described legal votes were in place.
"You also have not addressed the Butterfly ballot "
I'll take that... the butterfly ballots in Florida were created in a heavily Democrat county BY democrats. They are the idiots that made it so damn confusing and then tried to act like it wasn't their fault people were confused.