Amen to that epsilon.

completely rediculas, i live in a republican stat (idaho) and that would be a completely unfair move unless all the states become like that.

Also mr stick republicanism i thought just ment that represinitives lead the country instead of voting on everything, which means it does not have any effect on voting. Voting should still be popular vote if you ask me.

Electoral college can stay, as long as the popular vote issue does not occur to much. It has happened, big time a few times (election of 1824 was quite big and full of scandels)

The first paragraph is all I needed to read to realize this guy's article is laughable. I feel sorry for anyone who believes this rubbish.

So because people don't catch them screwing around with the system, that makes it OK?  See, I can ask oversimplifying rhetorical questions, too.

The propaganda behind this movement talks about how the 2000 election was "unfair" because Gore won the popular vote but Bush won the electoral vote.  Well, if we look at the 2000 election, but assume that California had adopted this system, Gore would still have won the popular vote, and Bush would still have won the electoral vote, but by a much wider margin.  So in fact, changing the policy in just one state actually widens the gap between the popular vote and the electoral vote.  This is exactly opposite to the intended result!

The results in the 2004 election would be similarly skewed.  Kerry got 48% of the popular vote to Bush's 51%, and Kerry received 47% of the electoral vote to Bush's 53%.  If California had adopted this system, Kerry would have received 43% of the electoral vote to Bush's 57%.  Still think this is an improvement?

 Perhaps it's hard to gain a perspective on this if you're not from California. I've been aggresively asked to sign petitions to get this undemocratic measure on the ballot. It annoys me. It annoys me that politicians think they could do this to the people. And idiots who support these measures, who can't see past an abortion debate or any other political issue to realize what it would do to our democracy (more or less destroy for a while) pisses me off. Right now, the Republican party seems to me to be the most dangerous group in America, because they've shown they're cool with making Hugo Chavez style attempts at power.

In what way exactly do you think she could possibly do a worse job than the current administration has done? They've failed at everything except whoring out to corporations and damaging the country and subverting its Constitution.

[edit:  I'm not any huge fan of Senator Clinton, but the raw hatred of her I often see completely mystifies me.]

I agree, but "she's no worse than Bush!" is hardly a motivational campaign slogan.  :P