By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - USA Election '08: Rigging?

Bursche on 03 December 2007
whatever said:
Bursche said:
Wow biased much?

"In the long, hot autumn of 2000, the world was shocked by the contempt for democracy shown by the Republican Party. They knew their man had lost the popular vote to Al Gore by half a million votes. They knew the majority of voters in Florida itself had pulled a lever for Gore. But they fought -- amid the confetti of hanging chads -- to stop the state's votes being counted, and to ensure that the Supreme Court imposed George W. Bush on the nation."

This right here is where I totally blew off this man's opinion. Our political system is based off of the electoral votes, not popular. People need to realize this. This is how it has always been and most likely always will be. He makes it seem like the Republicans stole the election when all they did was try not to waste everyone's time in Florida by recounting everyone's votes. It was stupid to hold a recount.


HUH? Waisting everyones time? Are you kidding me? This is generally considered the most important position in the world right now. You think it would be a waste of time to take an extra week to get it right? Especially since the winner wouldn't take office for another 2 months. Talk about biased. The ONLY reason the republicans didn't want a recount was because there was a strong possiblity they might lose.

 


 They took, I believe, two weeks to recount it and asked for even more time. It wasnt the Republicans that were worried, it was the Democrats holding on the smallest hope that they might win. Even the 2004 election the Democrats almost asked for a recount in Ohio to make sure they lost. Its a waste of time and just makes us all look like idiots (which it did.)



Brawl FC: 4382-1668-1880
Name:Brsch

Animal Crossing City Folk

FC: 2492-8227-9090           Town: McAwesom          Name: Gary

Add me and send me a PM with your FC!

Around the Network
Entroper on 03 December 2007
ckmlb said:
@Final Fan: I read the that and it still doesn't answer why the writer of the article is against proportional representation. If electoral votes were split proportionally then the winner of the popular vote would win...

@NJ5: Each state decides on thei own what system to follow if they want, so if California decides they want it this way it's entirely fair.

@Entroper: to the writer of the article and the OP who posted with no comment meaning he/she agrees.

If electoral votes were split proportionally for the entire country, then the winner of the popular vote would win.  Implementing this would require an amendment to the Constitution.  If people really wanted to change the system, they'd be trying to change the Constitution, not get California and California only to adopt this new system.

They are close to getting the number of signatures they need to secure a referendum in June. (The Los Angeles Downtown News claims to have witnessed signature-gatherers offering homeless people food in return for signing.) The turnout for the referendum is expected to be extremely low, because the statewide primaries usually held on that date have been moved forward to February. So the Republicans only have to activate a small part of their base to push it through -- and they have the cash to do it.

Is this what you mean by California deciding they want it this way?



http://entroper.no-ip.org

mrstickball on 03 December 2007

Considering the democrats have tried to do the same thing in key states since the 2000 elections, I fail to see why the Republicans are getting flack for trying to do the same thing.

Recently, Colorado was trying to do a similar, really stupid, thing.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

NJ5 on 03 December 2007
mrstickball said:
Considering the democrats have tried to do the same thing in key states since the 2000 elections, I fail to see why the Republicans are getting flack for trying to do the same thing.

Doesn't that just mean that both parties should get flack for it? No matter whether each state should change or not,  it really sounds like they're trying to get the rules changed only where it benefits them.

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

ckmlb on 03 December 2007

@Entroper: So because turnout could be low then Californians aren't getting what they want?

The people who care will show up and vote, those who don't only have themselves to blame.



Thanks to Blacksaber for the sig!

Around the Network
mrstickball on 03 December 2007

NJ5 - Yes, and both parties should be shot for trying to do away with the electoral college. America is still a Republic, not Democratic, form of government.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

Nintendownsmii on 03 December 2007

And that is a good thing?



famousringo on 03 December 2007
ckmlb said:
@Final Fan: I read the that and it still doesn't answer why the writer of the article is against proportional representation. If electoral votes were split proportionally then the winner of the popular vote would win...


 From the article:

" If this were being done in every state, everywhere, it would be an improvement. California's forgotten Republicans would be represented in the Electoral College, and so would Texas' forgotten Democrats."

 He's not against it, he's against the selective application of it. 



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

famousringo on 03 December 2007
mrstickball said:
NJ5 - Yes, and both parties should be shot for trying to do away with the electoral college. America is still a Republic, not Democratic, form of government.


 This logical fallacy brought to you by Appeal to Tradition.



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

epsilon72 on 03 December 2007
mrstickball said:
NJ5 - Yes, and both parties should be shot for trying to do away with the electoral college. America is still a Republic, not Democratic, form of government.

I agree-

Dems and Reps need to quit whining and run a straightforward, clean campaign/election! (but we all know that's not going to happen...)

All I care about really is that Hillary doesn't end up in office *shudders*