Something I noticed about JTs predictions

[CaryP]

Something I noticed about JTs predictions

Originally posted by vortex@Oct 26 2004, 04:49 AM
You need to campain for a proportional representation system for voting. Then you can vote for smaller parties and still make a difference.

​

Well said, and welcome to the plantation vortex. Saw that you're from the UK. We've got a growing crowd from across the pond, so you're in good company. We need something to change over here. The proportional representation may be the only way to bring about change without a total rewrite of the whole system.

Cary

 

[Darkwolf]

Something I noticed about JTs predictions

Pardon my ignorance, what exactly is a proportional representation system?

 

[CaryP]

Something I noticed about JTs predictions

The electoral college is an example of non-proportional representation. In most states, if not all, whoever gets the most votes gets all of the electoral college votes from that state. That's how Gore had the most popular votes in 2000, but lost the electoral college vote. That's if you believe the Supreme Court didn't hand Bush the election. Proportional voting would give third parties some representation rather than basically none now. The two predominant parties would have to start including the third party candidates rather than ignore them. Parliamentary politics in other countries where a majority can be put together by a grouping of smaller political parties is an example of proportional representation. Is it perfect? No, but it's a start out of the Demopublican/Republicrat one party system we have now.

Cary

 

[Darkwolf]

Something I noticed about JTs predictions

Ah, how is this for a radical idea. Streight popular vote. The reasoning behind the electoral college is no longer valid, so why don't we give it up altogether?

 

[KiraSjon]

Something I noticed about JTs predictions

I've often wondered the same thing myself, Darkwolf.
Seems like it's just too easy for votes to be bought and swayed that way.

 

[Judge Bean]

Something I noticed about JTs predictions

Originally posted by Darkwolf@Oct 26 2004, 11:14 AM
Ah, how is this for a radical idea. Streight popular vote. The reasoning behind the electoral college is no longer valid, so why don't we give it up altogether?

​

Yes the thing has to go. One in six Republican presidents has been put into office overriding the popular vote; no Democrats. Looks like an imbalance worthy of adjustment, and not just because of the nature of the split; I would say the same thing if it were reversed.

There is something strangely wise about the popular vote. I do not think that we would be in the mess we're in today if we hadn't overridden it in 2000. We would still have had 911, no doubt, or something like it, but everything afterward would have gone differently-- and according to the popular will, somehow.

Close to a thousand servicemen have so far declined combat in Iraq at different levels. No one has been charged with desertion or treason as far as I know.

Yet.

 

[Darkwolf]

Something I noticed about JTs predictions

Yes the thing has to go. One in six Republican presidents has been put into office overriding the popular vote; no Democrats. Looks like an imbalance

]


You forgot about Kennedy.

 

[Judge Bean]

Something I noticed about JTs predictions

Originally posted by Darkwolf@Oct 27 2004, 02:20 AM

Yes the thing has to go. One in six Republican presidents has been put into office overriding the popular vote; no Democrats. Looks like an imbalance

]


You forgot about Kennedy.

​

I thought that Kennedy got the popular vote by a couple of hundred thousand in Chicago. Have I got that wrong? My apologies. OK: one Democrat down, dozen to go.

 

[The_Ruffneck]

Something I noticed about JTs predictions

So in the United States voting system what if theoretically everyone voted for the independant and put the main 2 parties behind him , the independant would get in ? or would it be the highest vote from either of the 2 main parties .... i don't really understand what you meant when you said 2 party system

 

[Timmy G]

Something I noticed about JTs predictions

If you would like an excellent web page for better understanding the Electoral College, Battleground states, and past elections - you can visit this page: BBC News World Edition US Election Map. Ironically, its at the BBC site 'oh: and not here in the US, however it is the best I have found. IT uses a 'flash' interface that is very friendly. Lots of information can be found by clicking on each state independantly throughout the presentation.

The electoral college is an example of non-proportional representation. In most states, if not all, whoever gets the most votes gets all of the electoral college votes from that state.

That sounds about right to me, with the exception of Maine and Nebraska, who have eliminated the "Winner Takes All" process and now divide their electors by the proportion of the popular vote given to each candidate. (While the common sense reasoning behind this program is so blatently obvious it goes unused nationwide - and should be used in every state, without a doubt).

I personally believe our system is antiquated and simply stated the electoral college could use a good flushing. The electoral college, in its present tense, could easily be used as a way to 'rig' an election, and that has obviously happened in the past.

Just another way to keep the 'sheep' in their corner.

This is America - I mean, why shouldn't the popular vote win? *sarcasm