User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:45:43 AM EDT
[#1]
Fuck off. Fuck your poll too. Commie bitch. ..err Commie troll.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:45:47 AM EDT
[#2]
uuuuum.....
no. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:45:47 AM EDT
[#3]
I do.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:46:49 AM EDT
[#4]
are you ok buddy? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:46:59 AM EDT
[#5]
So far that's two dummies......
 Sgatr15 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:48:06 AM EDT
[#6]
Anyone remember the results of the popular vote in 1992?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:48:11 AM EDT
[#7]
My reading shows 1 dummy. That's what [1] means, right?  And of course, after posting that, dummy 2 votes "yes." Nevermind. "Tyranny of the Masses," anyone? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:49:03 AM EDT
[#8]
The Electoral College is the cornerstone of Presidential Elections.
It was probably the most original idea that the Founding Fathers came up with to firmly establish this Nation as a Republic, and NOT a pure democracy! Thank God for Our Founding Fathers! Eric The(HistoryIsFundamental)Hun 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:49:24 AM EDT
[#9]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:50:09 AM EDT
[#10]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:51:10 AM EDT
[#11]
yeah but wasnt it put in place because the whole populace could not make a educated decision about the POTUS because there was no national News or radio back then. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:51:11 AM EDT
[#12]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:51:51 AM EDT
[#13]
For arguments sake, if the EC is needed for President, why not then push for electoral style elections for state governors? The structure is in place, but it's a popular election.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:52:13 AM EDT
[#14]
No.
Historically the majority has proven itself to be one of the worst sources for freedom and justice. More votes(voters) do NOT equal better decisions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:52:19 AM EDT
[#15]
Im just wondering why the Electoral Vote system is better, not trying to push my views on anyone.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:52:52 AM EDT
[#16]
+1 here too! |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:56:18 AM EDT
[#17]
The Hunster said all that needs to be said! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:56:41 AM EDT
[#18]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:56:44 AM EDT
[#19]
+1 I've always wondered about that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:01:01 AM EDT
[#20]
The Electoral College is the fundamental tool that prevents the major population centers from running roughshod over the rural population. As mentioned before it promotes a Republic over a pure Democracy (AKA Mob Rule).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:03:14 AM EDT
[#21]
+1 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:04:12 AM EDT
[#22]
but the one thing that bugs me about the whole system is the electorates from each state dont have to vote in favor of the states winner, so they can in theory steal the election
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:05:23 AM EDT
[#23]
You're kidding right? If this was the standard, we'd have gotten rid of the winner take all system years ago. If 50%+ of a states votes goes to one candidate, that candidate gets ALL of that states electors (except for a couple of states). Examine Cali! The elector system actually DEPRIVES rural voters of power by rendering the opposition votes immaterial. Not to mention that the EC mirrors house districts, which is a function of population anyway... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:06:15 AM EDT
[#24]
have they installed that new ignore button yet?? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:06:53 AM EDT
[#25]
no
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:08:00 AM EDT
[#26]
The national news media does not help the average voter become more educated about the cantidates for President of the United States. Haven't you learned anything from the CBS debacle? Leave the Electoral College system in place! |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:10:46 AM EDT
[#27]
EC has NOTHING to do with House Districts. We have 19 House Districts in PA, and our electoral votes are all awarded to the winner of the state, not the winner of each of the 19 districts. The EC was designed so that the states as states have an important role to play in the election of the President. We live in a federal republic, and the states are intended by the Founders to be important centers of power. If people understood the basic premises of our Constitution, this question would never be asked. Unless one was seeking to fundamentally alter the nature of our nation... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:12:59 AM EDT
[#28]
If we went by true popular vote, as a citizen of the state of Georgia, I would have no voice whatsoever in electing a president, the states of California and New York would control all legistation, as it is now they still dominate what happens, but we do get some power.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:16:13 AM EDT
[#29]
Sure. Bill Clinton: Pop. Vote: 44,909,326 George H. W. Bush: Pop. Vote: 39,103,882 H. Ross Perot: Pop. Vote: 19,741,657 I'm not sure what that proves. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:16:48 AM EDT
[#30]
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:16:49 AM EDT
[#31]
The EC was put in for a reason, and a darn good one. Leave it alone. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:18:00 AM EDT
[#32]
PWNED! 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:18:04 AM EDT
[#33]
How is this different from having an overpowering number of electors? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:22:41 AM EDT
[#34]
The original Constitutional method of picking a POTUS is my choice.....and the method of States getting their senators..............kept the govt. teat suckers from having such a loud voice. Dave S |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:23:41 AM EDT
[#35]
I wish people would stop fucking with my constitution
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:27:27 AM EDT
[#36]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:27:59 AM EDT
[#37]
Electoral College helps:
1. keep states' rights intact 2. prevent "urban voters" from running roughshod over "rural voters" |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:29:02 AM EDT
[#38]
its funny, around here it seems you cant just ask a question without being labeled a troll or a commie I never said that it was my opinion that we should do away with them Electoral System, just trying to gain some knowledge on the matter |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:32:32 AM EDT
[#39]
Large population centers HAVE BEEN TRYING to get rid of the electoral college for many years. Fortunately they haven't been sucessful because the FF's decided to require 2/3 vote in congress and 3/4 of the states to ratify a constitutional amendment IIRC. Cities hate the electoral college, but can't do anything about it because the FF's decided to permanently assist the less populous centers by giving the STATES the vote and not the people. This prevents Hillary Clinton and her inifinite ranks of DUmmies from ruling your central Wyoming way of life (I know you aren't really from WY, it is just an illustration). Sounds fair to me. Take care of your own state. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:33:27 AM EDT
[#40]
Very stupid idea.
Next question please. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:38:04 AM EDT
[#41]
It depends solely on the questions asked, actually. Had I asked this very same question, I would just as likely be chastised for questioning the wisdom and utility of the Electoral College process by which the United States has always chosen its National Leader. Simply put, the Electoral College protects the States, particularly the smaller, less populated States, by giving them recognition as corporate bodies that have a vital stake in the election of the President. Remember, the Senate used to be comprised of Senators chosen by the State Legislatures in their respective States. It was likely a mistake to remove that basis for selection. Sorry, but I don't want to live in a nation controlled by those populous 'people's republics' on the Left and East Coasts! Eric The(IfFirstYouDon'tSecede,Try,Try,Again)Hun
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:40:14 AM EDT
[#42]
oh and I agree with you but I was just wanting to get other peoples opinons on it, like I said on my previous edited post |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:40:26 AM EDT
[#43]
BAM! ETH comes through with the "bingo!" post of the day - BG |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 11:03:50 AM EDT
[#44]
+1 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 11:06:52 AM EDT
[#45]
+1 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 11:12:16 AM EDT
[#46]
In response to the comments expressed by Repub18:
1. You commented that the reason the EC was established was because of the lack of knowledge the common individual had about national affairs. This is no different today: a majority of people have no idea about the issues our nation is facing nor the possible solutions proposed both sides to resolve said problems. 2. We don't mean to attack you and if your feelings are hurt by people labeling you as a "Commie" or "Troll" then pack up your toys and roll on home. Furthermore, if you value the criticisms of individuals conversing over the Internet, then you may need some courses in self-confidence. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 11:35:44 AM EDT
[#47]
I'm neither pro nor con at this point, but nobody has shown me how the EC does anything more than give the illusion of states rights. The rural or less populated states do not fare any better with the EC, as the number of electors granted follows population anyway, and the winner takes all (on a state level) kills this argument by rendering the minority position null.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 11:41:19 AM EDT
[#48]
Straight majority voting absolutely takes away the vote of the less populous areas as well, i.e. >50% wins the election. At least a smaller states votes can be won, and used in the talley, rather than diluting them all with big city votes. Sure, the liberals get all 53 in CA, but we get all the prarie and mountain states, and they add up to more than CA. Taken all together it would easily be possible for the total surplus Democrat voters to outnumber the surplus Republican voters in the other states. The number of electors doesn't actually follow the population proportionately, but you know that already. This has the effect of taking a little bit of voting power away from the big cities and placing it with the smaller less polulated areas. If DiFi could have gotten 51 votes "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in." she would have according to her own words. Fortunately she won't get those votes, and her rabid majority won't ever be able to fully and explicitly control those of us in fly-over country. The electoral college isn't a simple thing to understand in it's full impact, as simple as it is, but I have come to believe that it is a very good thing. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 11:54:03 AM EDT
[#49]
+1 |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 11:54:44 AM EDT
[#50]
Sorry for the double tap.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
