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: i-node who wrote (160376)	2/8/2003 3:24:01 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578514

I would venture to say that the EC gives states very little influence in selecting a president. How in the hell can you say this when you are chronically saying Bush didn't win the election because Gore got the popular vote? Three points about the EC.......it was intended to reduce voter fraud; if it helped any state to influence an election, it was to be a small state, and it was supposed to enhance the margin of the winner of the popular vote. In the last pres. election, it did none of the above. In fact, voter fraud was enhanced in FLA; it helped a large state, FLA, decide the outcome of the election; and it enhanced the margin of the loser of the popular vote. You do the math......Bush won in spite of losing the popular vote and all the good intentions of the EC. Bush won the Electoral vote; about this there is no question. Gore won the popular vote, no doubt. It all came down to Florida, where Bush won the Electoral votes, and as a result was elected (if you ignore the attempted theft by Gore, which led to the various lawsuits). Your reasoning (actually, lack thereof) defies all logic. Reread the above slowly. ted