Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (160282)	2/7/2003 9:57:40 AM
From: brian1501	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578758

However, like I said to D.Ray, I think the EC is outdated. Ray confirmed that with his posting of the founding fathers comments. I had forgotten the EC was intended to make up for what they perceived as the colonists political incompetency. Some of those delegates were federalists or tories, and tended to be elitist in their view of this new democracy. The EC was a safeguard put in by these people. If you do away with the EC, you might as well do away with States in general. Remember, we are a union of States. It was not that long ago that Senators were appointed by the state legislatures. People voted for their state reps, then those reps voted for the federal reps. The EC makes smaller states important too. They might as well remove themselves from the union otherwise as they would never have an impact on the election. Nobody would campaign outside of the big cities. Brian

To: tejek who wrote (160282)	2/7/2003 9:58:35 AM
From: jjayxxxx	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578758

Ted, I think the NW and heartland are already overlooked. I disagree. They came to Portland for the last election anyway. Maybe not as much as the biggies, but they did at least stop by a couple times. However, assuming you are right and they are already overlooked, if the election was purely by popular vote it would be a mess. Campaigns would focus on heavily populated areas leaving the other areas even further in the cold than they already are. Plus, a close election would make the whole country a Florida-like mess. I think it needs to be abolished particularly when it can subvert the will of the people like it did in the last presidential election. I know you aren't an old dog, so why not learn something here? Had the vote been popular-based the results would have likely been significantly different. But in which direction we'll never know because it wasn't campaigned that way. As it was, they campaigned in the states that were close. Had it been popular-based, they would have campaigned in populous states instead. In other words, the will of the people was precisely what resulted - GWB became president - because that was the way the election was campaigned and run. FWIW, JJ