Dems will try to steal election just like they did in 2000

Originally posted by Dagger
It's too bad that the US isn't a true democracy :bnghd:

Of course it isnt a true 100% democracy. We are a representative democracy. We vote to put people into office who will decide our laws. We do not vote on the laws. Can you imagine voting every day? Its not a job that too many people will take easily. So there is nothing wrong with our system, it is a Representative Democracy and it works. You vote for them, they vote for the laws. Thats how it goes.

no need to become offensive about it. I was just making a statement.

-Dagger

I think the fact that you guys dont directly vote for your leader kinda shows your system is flawed... I popular vote should decide who wins, not the EC. If more people wanted Gore to be president, then he should have been coz thats what the people want... a democracy is supposed to represent the people and the majority... yours obviously doesnt.

Originally posted by specialasianX
I think the fact that you guys dont directly vote for your leader kinda shows your system is flawed... I popular vote should decide who wins, not the EC. If more people wanted Gore to be president, then he should have been coz thats what the people want... a democracy is supposed to represent the people and the majority... yours obviously doesnt.

I agree with you there. The country would be better off w/out the EC. I think Colorado is trying to make it so the popularity vote only counts. They could have changed it by now so don't quote me on it.

-Dagger

Hey, if we want to get rof the electorial college, thats fine. Lets vote on it. But..and this is the big but..most expected Bush to get the majority and Gore to get the most Electorial votes before the 2000 and election...and as I recall...everyone was fine with that scenario. That being said, if we want to enact legislation to remove this from our system, we cannot make it retro-active just because we didn't like the outcome of the election the way it went. The rules must be established before hand and the game must be played by them. Florida's law stated that Ms. Harris HAD to ratify its results within a certain time period as well. To fail to do so would have put her in violation of her oath of office. Now I know many of you don't take that kind of thing seriously but some do. If we want provisions for numerous recounts until the desired outcome is reached then we must enact the legislation BEFORE hand otherwise all we can do is look toward the future and try and make it better.

The system of puinch cards was flawed in that a no more than two recounts could be done in the time allowed by law. Both with the same outcome. Now, if we want it different, we have to change one or both of those parameters. The system used to vote or the time allowed to do multiple recounts. I'm personally fine with either or both but we cannot make the rules as we go. I had a highschool Lit teacher that did that because he was so damned scatter brained he always put open ended questions on his tests that he would judge what the correct answer was later. This kind of making the rules after the game to determine the winner you want is not acceptable.

Does anyone have any Idea how we the people could actually go about getting rid of the EC? I want to pick my leader. I dont want to pick someone to pick for me. If there are any Ideas, I would love to hear them. If there are any ideas worth doing, I will definately follow up on them.

Sure, write your congressman and senator. Get a petition and get enough people to get on board with you to have it brought to a referendum and put on the agenda to change an amendment. This is no easy task which prevents a few disgruntled people froma making major changes that affect us all. If there is a big enough outcry and our election of our local state representatives begins to see it as an issue, it can happen but you, yourself , cannot make changes for the rest of us on a whim.

The electorial college is an important part of our representative republic and is a safeguard to prevent more heavily populated areas such as major cities from imposing their political will on the less populated but important heartland of the US. If this were allowed to happen the interest of those who live in cities would totally overide those who grow the food for them. While it may be hard to foresee, its was thought of enough by our founders to put in place this safeguard to assure we did not become detatched from the ideals of liberty, vote our food producers into obscurity and starve ourselves to death.

This has been the way of this system from the beginning and I doubt it will change because of one election. You might try living under another form of government if this one doesn't suit your tastes.

I will say that while I may seem pro Bush in my reasoning, it really has nothing to do with this minute period in US history. I speak with an overall view of the system not just because my guy lost last time but such is the nature with people. You never stop to think that maybe the safeguard you are bitching about now may be the safeguard that repels Bush next month.

For the record, I'm a dem and although I don't care that much personally for Kerry or his Jane Fonda leanings, I'm hoping he wins because the sheer amount of whining on this board and the media for the last 4 years had made me so sick and repulsed that it has to stop soon. I'm not rich so what the hell do I care if they get taxed? I don't. I just hope the poor's tax burden doesn't increase which is what I fear. I'm not poor but seeing some who were be relieved of their tax burden totally was nice while it lasted. I trust Kerry to keep his word and only raise taxes on the rich which to me means the ultra-elite millionaires. I sure hope Joe Sixpack who makes 40 grand a year for a family of four isn't considered rich but we've yet to clearly define the range in the views of us democrats. For the record also I think both of these parties are out to eleiminate the middle class. It seems that when the dem tax us, they hit the middle class the hardest because they are in bed with the rich as well (and the poor can't pay) and when the republicans give tax relief, its the wealthy who benefit most. The result is a class system of rich and poor. Peasants and Lords. Now where have we seen that before?

well, its not saying much, but the US government is the best government for the people, but I think there needs to be a total restructuring internally. When our government was formed, the priorities of the day were much different than now. I know we have ammendments to the constitution, but that can only carry us so far. Maybe its time we looked for a change.

I think Ill start a poll on getting rid of the EC. Im curious to see how many people agree/disagree with this thought and why.

The only restructuring I can see that we need more than any os the elimination of the IRS. Another good example of what happens when someone makes the rules after the game has already been played.