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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D. Long who wrote (39523)	4/15/2004 3:19:13 AM
From: Michelino	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 793845

Your argument is specious. The Electoral College is nothing but an extremely rough approximation of the popular vote. It was nonsense to let an entire state's electoral votes go to a winner who's margin of victory was less than the margin of error of the voting method. The whole science of statistics refutes the conclusion. So even without considering fraud, Bush's victory was just noise. Continuing with this theme is 1960 - a famous myth among Republicans. You have forgotten that millions of Black voters were prevented from even going to the polls...it would have been a runaway for JFK if not for racism. That was the real stink. The bigots of Mississippi, where 95% of the black population was not allowed to vote, even refused to give Kennedy his electoral due. The hogwash about 1960 is passed like a shaman's story between partisan generations. It remains that there is no logical argument to defeat the proposition "that the electoral college is a subversion of the principle of one-man-one-vote."

To: D. Long who wrote (39523)	4/15/2004 8:11:13 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793845

Congress doesn't have the votes to amend the Constitution to do away with the Electoral College and substitute popular vote, probably never will. Set up that way for a reason. We've always been a Constitutional Republic, not a true democracy. Probably always will be. Pure democracy is mobocracy, thought the Founding Fathers, and that was back when only a few could vote, compared to now. You can't change the Constitution with pure popular vote, need two thirds of the states. Ironic, what? Think Wyoming, Alaska, North Dakota will lose any sleep because New York city vote and LA vote don't have the same effect as they would if the President was selected by popular vote? Ha!