On 5/12/06, Ian Skinner wrote: > I may be a bit off, as mentioned I don't have time to review the entire > thread. So I'm doing this from memory. So I may be misquoting the original > post, or even crossing up with a completely different post. But taking the > basic idea that some have said they would vote for just about anybody of any > race or gender, rather then Bush or Bush-heir. I would point out that Bush > is in office because a significant number of our county's conservative > population did just this in the opposite direction. You Sam may not be one > of them. But I feel many did vote for Bush as a counter to the perceived > anti-Christian/liberal sway of the other side.
I don't agree but at least party affiliation means they stand for something enough to get the endorsement. By choosing someone because they're not the party you're voting against is still making a qualified decision. Picking someone based solely on gender is just bad and should be frowned upon. > Point two: > It would be desirable to have a system to improve the voting results. > This, I actually agree to in principle, but in practicality scares me. > Wasn't the original concept of the Electoral College for this purpose? The > public does not actually vote for the president, but rather a representative > to go, collectively with all the other representatives elected across the > country, hash out who will be president. > > Now these representatives, theoretically, are supposed to be learned and > informed individuals who can use their intelligence and wisdom to pick the > best choice. But this has long been changed. Many states have dictated by > law that all the states representatives will vote for the candidate that > received the most votes by the public in the state. This, in my mind, > removes any possible benefit of the college and making the election of our > country's leader more and more like a high school election for prom king (or > queen when and if a female is elected). > Problem with having someone to correct your bad choice is the possibility of corruption. While expecting people to know whom they vote for is a given, I don't see any possibility of it being enforced which is why I figured it wasn't worth debating. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:206693 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
