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 (201009)	9/9/2004 11:28:02 AM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574207

re: Sparsely populated states are states nevertheless. It isn't fair that we have ZERO say. The EC is one critical way that we have at least SOME input into the process. You are from AR, right? You have 6 electoral votes, so your per capita influence is actually diluted by the smaller states that get a minimum of 3. Frankly, I think the effect might be the opposite. Right now these guys just need to win in the big battleground states, by a slim majority, so they fight in those states for each vote. If every vote from every state counted the same, you might see them more in AR. At any rate, I didn't intend to get into a 10 post discussion of this, it's not an importnat issue to me. And I don't think it's a Dem/Rep issue, or a Conservative/Liberal issue. I think it's just an issue of what works best, and allows each vote to count the same. MHO, that would be the popular vote. John

To: i-node who wrote (201009)	9/9/2004 12:58:02 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574207

There are a lot of issues; this is but one. My perspective is that of a person from a small state which has minimal popular vote influence. Arkansas would never be heard from, at all, without the electoral college. NY, CA, TX, they'd control the situation. Sparsely populated states are states nevertheless. It isn't fair that we have ZERO say. The EC is one critical way that we have at least SOME input into the process. Otherwise, you've got NY liberals, unduly influenced by, for example, the NY Times Propaganda Machine, controlling the the election process. It works that way in state elections; it works that way in other countries...........the whole issue of the EC is ridiculous. The EC was an instrument of the elite to insure that they maintained a modicum of control over the elections. Its outdated and it unfairly can put a person in the WH who was not popularly elected. That's enough reason to abolish it. Small states get their power in the Senate. That was the intent of the FF. To claim small states have some control over the election because of the EC is nonsense.