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: Jim McMannis who wrote (200957)	9/9/2004 12:34:41 AM
From: Tenchusatsu	Respond to of 1574683

Jim, The trouble is that without the electoral college, one big state that votes heavily in one direction can determine the election. Personally, I'm not ready to let New York or the left coast do that. I can understand, but aren't these the very states who will be paying for Florida's recovery efforts? ;-) Oh well, I doubt there will be many people who move to Wyoming just to make their vote "count" more. Tenchusatsu

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (200957)	9/9/2004 1:00:17 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574683

RE:"The only reason now to get rid of the Electoral College is that it's rather archaic, but that's a far cry from saying it "votes against equality."" The trouble is that without the electoral college, one big state that votes heavily in one direction can determine the election. Personally, I'm not ready to let New York or the left coast do that. How is that any different that any other election? Miami might be able to swing a statewide election in its favor but in reality, the bigger the population base the less effect any one entity has on an election. In fact, with the exception of two elections, the popular vote in this country has been in sync with the electoral college vote. Its when they aren't the trouble starts.