At 02:36 PM 10/11/2004 -0700 David Brin wrote: > >--- "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> At 01:46 PM 10/11/2004 -0700 David Brin wrote: >> >> And the point is,a higher percentage of Americans >> >> were happy with the >> >> outcome of the 2000 elections than the 1992 >> >> elections. >> > >> >Typically and utterly and diametrically opposite to >> >the truth. >> >> In what way? >> >> Bush 2000 - 47.87% >> >> Clinton 1992 - 43.01% > >Dan and I have already dealt with the Perot/Nader comparison.
I don't know what Nader has to do with anything? You stated your objection to Bush being elected without a plurality. I stated that I find being elected without a plurality to be no more objectionable than being elected with a mere 43.01% of the vote. JDG P.S. In paticular, I do not agree that Gore "won" the popular vote in 2000, since no popular vote was taken or counted. Suffice to say, that if the popular vote meant anything, turnout patterns would likely have been much different - and could easily have produced a 0.5% difference. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
