Apparently (II) ...
Originally Posted by Chazmo,Nov 2 2004, 10:28 AM
Jeff, so sorry it was such a fuck up! I hear what you're saying, and that kind of bad stuff can definitely put people off in the future.
Ultimately, I hope we'll all be voting online someday, and we'll abolish the electoral college. Well, hey, I can dream.
Ultimately, I hope we'll all be voting online someday, and we'll abolish the electoral college. Well, hey, I can dream.

My past voting experiences (one absentee in 2000 and two minor elections in a different district) were quick and painless. I'm not entirely sure what happened this morning, but it was frustrating.
And yes, someday I suspect voting will be online, though ridding us of the electoral college poses all sorts of problems.
Actually, what I'd really like to see is the formal voting day moved to Saturday. It would spread the day out and make it much easier for people to vote.
I don't see the Republicans ever letting that happen though, as it would severely hurt their strength, just like getting rid of the electoral college.
I don't see the Republicans ever letting that happen though, as it would severely hurt their strength, just like getting rid of the electoral college.
Interesting, Jeff... Do you think that the Republicans have a more vested interest in the electoral college than other parties? I mean, obviously, it worked in the Republicans favor in 2000, but is that a permanent advantage, so to speak?
Originally Posted by Chazmo,Nov 2 2004, 11:08 AM
Interesting, Jeff... Do you think that the Republicans have a more vested interest in the electoral college than other parties? I mean, obviously, it worked in the Republicans favor in 2000, but is that a permanent advantage, so to speak?
Originally Posted by Chazmo,Nov 2 2004, 11:08 AM
Interesting, Jeff... Do you think that the Republicans have a more vested interest in the electoral college than other parties? I mean, obviously, it worked in the Republicans favor in 2000, but is that a permanent advantage, so to speak?
Our electoral college makes less populated states stronger in relation to their population than the more heavily populated ones. Essentially a measure of voting power - someone in Wyoming has vastly more power than someone in Cali, even though Cali is more significant in terms of winning the election. And the less populated states tend to be more conservative; while the heavily populated coasts and upper midwest tend to be liberal (or at least middle of the road). Florida and Ohio seem to be the anomolies.
Without an electoral college, the GOP couldn't rely on the vast swath of less densely populated states in the middle and south of the US, because they simply don't have many people. They'd have to go after the big 30 (cities) - nearly all of which would tend to be a bit more liberal (as they see the benefits of the Democratic platform). For example, rural texas is very conservative; while Houston and Dallas (the 4th and 6th largest cities, I think) tend to be a bit liberal, and Austin is very liberal. In the EC, Democrats really have no chance to overcome that immensely conservative area; without an EC the Democrats could simply target Houston/Dallas/SanAntonio/Austin and let the ranchers and smaller cities vote GOP. It would significantly change the dynamics of the election; and it'd probably favor the Democratic party quite a bit.
Apparently the weather sucks today.
= Voting today may take a hour or so.
= School still Sucks.
= Superbabe and BFAmazon35 are felling better.
= All the Jell-O has been consumed.
= Mayor Mc Cheese won't win this year.
= We should know who the new Big Cheese will be, later tonight.
= Voting today may take a hour or so.
= School still Sucks.
= Superbabe and BFAmazon35 are felling better.
= All the Jell-O has been consumed.
= Mayor Mc Cheese won't win this year.
= We should know who the new Big Cheese will be, later tonight.







