libs plan violence against the Government when Bush wins.

[skiingman]

Eliminating the electoral college does not magically change us from "republic" to "direct democracy" guys.

[May'aki]

Your republic is also a representative democracy.

Which gives us the FREEDOM to vote for the representaive of OUR choice..... :p

[ngcsubutterbar]

yes there is a very historic reason for why it was done via a republic. True democracy for milenia was technologically infeasible and more often than naught impossible. It was made because large geographical areas were impossible to rule efficiently directly throughout history (thus states, thus counties, thus provinces, thus colonies). That has been true for all civilizations in the past.

We can; now, in this day and age actually count votes 1 for 1 now; and it's actually very possible to have a direct democracy. Whether our country or others, It's possible and efficient to do so. We have the ability to do this now. Whether or not we will I don't think it'll happen any time soon.

[oscarmitre]

Eliminating the electoral college does not magically change us from "republic" to "direct democracy" guys.

Well no, there's no connection between the two concepts, they're two different things.

[cecilVA]

Look. The Electoral College isn't perfect but its as fair a system that you could come up with (in my opinion). If you do it strictly off popular vote, then candidates will be campaigning in major urban areas to get more bang for the buck. Unfortunately there is still a rural America. I mean you have presidents campaigning in small towns in Ohio and Iowa. Wouldn't happen with a popular vote. Actually heard two governors on the news (Richardson (D) NM and Owens (R) Colorado) who both agreed that their relatively small states would get screwed if you got rid of the electoral system. Both of their states are battlegrounds so they are getting lots of attention. And states can obviously swing around, so its not like your vote is wasted.

Here's an example on the local level. I've talked to people that are from Washington State and their state elections are pretty much decided by the Seattle metro area. Its the most populous part of the state but they don't give a rats *** about any of the issues of the more rural eastern part of the state.

[ngcsubutterbar]

Here's an example on the local level. I've talked to people that are from Washington State and their state elections are pretty much decided by the Seattle metro area. Its the most populous part of the state but they don't give a rats *** about any of the issues of the more rural eastern part of the state.

That's a prime example of why I'd personally support split votes like a few states have done.


(also remember there wasn't 'supposed' to be campaigning when this thing was transfered from clasical era uses)

[acreature]

That's a prime example of why I'd personally support split votes like a few states have done.


(also remember there wasn't 'supposed' to be campaigning when this thing was transfered from clasical era uses)

Then how would anyone know who the candidates were?

[ngcsubutterbar]

back then, I don't know.

http://www.fec.gov/pages/ecmenu2.htm

might help. The document from which my list from above is within that page.

[Group9]

No way man.

When they first explained the system to me in the second grade (first Clinton election) I thought it was bonkers. Moral of story: 8 year olds can tell its silly.

-Garrett

When I was eight years old, I thought it was silly, too. Then as I got older, and learned more about what checks and balances were deemed necessary by men far smarter than what we seem able to produce today, I realized that the only sure way to mess up this great country we have inherited is to fool with the parts of it that we are just simply not bright enough as a nation to understand or appreciate.

[skiingman]

So why, in your words, is this system so wonderful?