50

I don't like bush..

What ever minority it's still wrong.

You have to show that you understand their needs and fears. But when you attack the mainstream for the benefit of the few it's wrong.

But equal rights was needed and did benefit America. What is needed now is to educate the poor so they can become a benefit to the country.

don't vote for him :Graucho
if you are from the USA

Only twice in the history of the United States has the Electoral College not reflected the national popular vote...and it is not because an election was rigged. It is because the Electorial College system worked as it was designed to work.

Bush 50 445 156
Gore 50 992 335

Only in America its possible to loose even when 500000 more People voted for you
:2 cents:

Thats democracy

The reason the Electoral college does NOT work is because there are always biased people casting votes for the "masses", trying to narrow down the results to only a few in most cases, as well as each state has a different # of votes based on it's population. Where to have a truely FAIR election process, each state should only have 12 votes.

There is absolutely NO reason why California should have 54 votes while Montana gets 3.

Each state should have 12 representatives from their state, with at least one of each of the following types of people on the panel:

African, Caucasion, Hispanic, Middle-Eastern, Asian, Female, Male, Wealthy, Poor, Blue Collar, White Collar, Youth, Elderly and so on... Covering as many broad backgrounds as possible within the 12 slots. Every 4 years new Electors should be voted in by popular vote.

Each of the states gets: 12 Votes (TOTAL: 612)
Each of the 6 US Territories should get: 9 Votes (TOTAL: 54)

The playing field needs to be leveled.

FUCK BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!

How in the hell do you figure that when Texas has a larger population than New York?

The Electoral College is outdated. The reason it made sense when it came about was the technology was not there to have a normal vote by vote election nationwide. It would have taken months for them to gather all the data.

The argument that there are more populated areas that would control more of the vote, why not use that argument on a state level? There are areas of CA that are heavily concentrated that control the majority of the vote for things such electing a Governor, thats just the way it is. Besides it happens now with the Electorals anyway.

One citizens vote should never count more than another citizens vote. The Electoral College means your vote may or may not directly affect the ultimate result, depending on where you live. There's no justifiable excuse for that. The need for an Electoral College is obsolete and it should be abolished.

The problem with leveling it is that there is only like 12 people in the entire state of Montana, and there are millions in California - so a Montana vote is worth a fuck of a lot more then a California vote under your system.

Thats why the founding fathers adopted a two house Congress, the House of Representatives is based on the population of a State, and the Senate is the "leveled playing field" since each state gets 2 Senators no matter what.

I believe that we should go to a popular vote system, people that say the election will be decided by New York and California don't seem to realize that is where the most people are, and just like when you are deciding which bar to go to with your friends, majority rules.

Remember, the President is representative of the country, if you don't want a Dem or Repub for your state, then be sure to go vote for your Governor - their decisions effect your life more anyways.

I thought you just had to cheat to be President

We're on the same boat dude!

According to Rasmussen,

Bush has 213 electoral votes

Kerry has 207

That leaves 118 undecided.

The candidate must have 270 to win the electoral college.

A lot can happen in 54 days

You'd be surprised how many people have no idea whatsoever how the system works. :2 cents:

It was Rasmussen that I was referring to and it says 213 to 175...as stated on the link you provided.

yes. i see. i was looking at the actual electoral table which rasmussen hasn't updated yet.

i see bush hasn't gained electoral votes in three months but the undecided column went up.

lol...:1orglaugh nice one!

The electoral college always follows the popular vote for that state....

You obviously missed the boat when they talked about the electoral college in high school huh?

Yes, 9 states contain 50% of the country's population, meaning that the other 41 would not really have a voice. -- without the Electoral College system that is.

Didn't the Democrats go out of their way to prevent the military votes from being counted../???

that's right. The dud lost his home state. LOL

Exactly. We are the most powerful and successful country in the world.

and will continue to be :)

No, he's merely content to take their money.

Kerry has never owned anybody, and is certainly getting his ass kicked by Bush.

In 1960 15 Electors from Virginia or West Virginia that were "pledged" to John F. Kennedy vote for Robert F. Byrd Sr. instead. (And he wasn't even running!)

So you really are against the doctrine of "The Majority Rules"?
Why not let whoever gets the most popular votes win, no matter what part of the country it comes from? It still means the MAJORITY rules as it should be when it comes to the Presidency.

:1orglaugh :thumbsup

NO..it is NOT the majority rules with the electoral college.
YOU MUST get at least 270 votes to win. So you can get the majority of electoral votes and NOT win. It then goes to the House Of Representatives to be decided.

Yeah..the above is REALLY a well thought out representative way of electing the highest office holder in the land!

You mean your "FAKE" brother don't you? Since he's not REALLY your brother.

You are trying to tell me that 51% of our voting population lives in these two states? :1orglaugh

That IS the point. NO one, yes, not even the "I'm a legend in my own mind" King has made ONE good point as to why we should keep the Electoral College & not let the majority of the voters rule.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by theking
This has never happened...in our history...to the best of my knowledge. It has only happened twice in our history that the winner of the Presidency lost the national popular vote.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ahh..yea of little comprehension...what does that have to do with my post?

Oh yee who lacks ANY originality and always posts the same lame "comeback".

Damn..you are stale! :1orglaugh

Easy answer. I believe that States that have different cultures/values should have a certain amount of parity when it comes to electing a President. I have made it abunduntanly clear that I approve of the Electorial College system...but I do not expect you to comprehend this.

Oh..that IS hilarious comming from a guy that was making a point that this country is the UNITED states!

"Different cultures/values" what fucking intrinsic cultures/values does one state have over another. NAME ONE! New York believes in no slavery while Alabama is FOR IT!?

Prejudices and discriminations..YES!

Well, I am pretty sure that Bush lost the vote in Florida. He told the cubans that they can not go back to visit family, unless it is every three years.

And they have a huge vote in the state.

Yes you must have a minimum of 270 electoral votes out of 538 electoral votes which is a majority...and to the best of my knowledge it has never gone to the House of Representatives.

Well...I am satisfied that my brothers do not consider themselves to be fake...but...no they are not my brothers by blood...but we are "brothers" none the less...faggot.

It t requires some ability to comprehend...but his statement was a figure of speech...comprende...no I don't think so.

I made perfectly good points...and others agree that the Electorial College is the way to go...you and some others just do not agree...comprende?

if everyone in the country was voting for Kerry, Bush would not have 213 electoral votes

this is why people from other countries should stay out of discussions about US politics . . . especially when they are clueless about how it works

When theking says BUsh has 213 electoral college votes, that is if the election was today, and the results were what the poll said they were.

Nothing is written in stone. If everyone votes for Kerry, then Bush will not have those EC votes

The list of differences is to long to list and you would not comprehend the differences. Yes we are a country of United States Each with individual State rights...each with laws that are in variance with other States...each with "slightly" different cultures/values. Each that would like to have a modicum of parity when it comes to electing a President.

forget it . . . some people will never understand that . . . it is like trying to explain the Trinity to an atheirst

If you got every single person in the states of ND, SD, WY, NV, AZ and a minority in the 5 most populated states, then you could have technically had more popular votes, but not enough EC votes

And as usual, you prove you don't know what the heck you are talking about by posting!

READ & LEARN:

"The first time the House of Representatives chose the President was in 1800. At that time, the President was the candidate who received the most electoral votes, and the Vice-President was the candidate who received the second most electoral votes. Thomas Jefferson was the Democratic-Republican candidate for President and Aaron Burr was his Vice-Presidential candidate. The Federalists nominated John Adams for a second term with his Vice-Presidential candidate Charles Cotesworth Pinckney as the Vice-Presidential candidate.

The Democratic-Republican electors forgot to withhold one electoral vote from Burr, so when the final results were announced, the results were Jefferson and Burr, 73 electoral votes each; Adams, 65; Pinckney, 64; and John Jay 1. It then fell to the lame duck Congress, with its partisan Federalist majority, to decide the result. When no candidate gets a majority of the electoral votes, the House of Representatives chooses the President. Each state has one vote, decided by a majority of its delegation, with a majority of the states needed for election.

To make a long story short, the Federalist House toyed with electing Aaron Burr, because they hated Jefferson so much. But in the end, after 36 ballots in all, Jefferson was elected President. It is well to remember that a lame duck House nearly elected Aaron Burr President rather than the author of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson.

The second time the House of Representatives picked the President was in 1824. In a four way race for President between Andrew Jackson, John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay and William H. Crawford. Crawford, secretary of the Treasury under James Monroe. When the electoral votes were counted, Jackson had 94, Adams 84, Crawford 41 and Clay 37. In the popular vote, Jackson led with 41.34%; Adams had 30.92%; Clay had 12.99% and Crawford 11.17%.

Under the 12th amendment to the Constitution, when no candidate gets a majority of the electoral votes, the names of the three top contenders - Jackson, Adams and an ailing Crawford, were placed before the House. Clay's support was vital to the frontrunners.

Again, to make a long story short, Clay agreed to support Adams in exchange for being made Secretary of State. In those days, Secretary of State was considered the best stepping stone to the White House.

When the House met to vote, Adams was supported by the six New England states and New York, and in large part through Clay's backing, by Maryland, Ohio, Kentucky, Illinois, Missouri and Louisiana. So, Adams was elected on the first ballot with 13 of the 24 states in the union at that time. The "deal" with Clay cast a cloud on Adams administration from which it never emerged.

Four years later, Andrew Jackson ran for President again making much of his contention that the House of Representatives had thwarted the will of the people by denying him the presidency in 1825, even though he had been the leader in electoral and popular votes. In 1828, Jackson was elected with 178 electoral votes to Adams 83, and 55.97% of the popular vote. Jackson's popular vote total was the highest percentage until Theodore Roosevelt was elected President in 1904 on the heels of William McKinley's assassination. Jackson went on to win re-election in 1832.

The third time the House chose the President was in the Hayes-Tilden election of 1876. Democrat Samuel J. Tilden, Governor of New York, won the election with 50.97% of the vote. However, Florida, South Carolina and Louisiana; southern states then under Republican carpetbag rule, submitted two sets of returns. The House was called upon to decide who won the electoral votes from these three states.

For Hayes to become President by a 185-184 margin, he needed to win all 19 of the contested electoral votes. If Tilden won even one of the electoral votes from Florida, Louisiana and South Carolina, he would have been elected president.

The Congress passed a law appointing a commission consisting of five House members, five Senate members and five Supreme Court Justices to decide the disputed electoral votes. The majority party (Democrats controlled the House and the Republicans controlled the Senate) was to have three members and the minority party two members of each delegation with two supreme court members each. The fifth supreme court member would be chosen by the other four.

To make another long story short, the commission awarded every disputed electoral vote to Hayes by a vote of 8-7, along strictly party lines. Civil War threatened. But Hayes agreed to withdraw federal troops from the south in exchange for the South agreeing to respect Negro rights. Hayes was elected President and kept his part of the bargain, but the South didn't keep theirs. For the next 20 years every presidential election margin was a plurality, razor thin margin."

http://www.leinsdorf.com/House.htm

Because then politicians would not even take the time to worry about the people in ND, SD, AZ, NE, WY, NV, OR . . .they would just concentrate their efforts on NY, CA, PA, OH, FL, TX