Are you trying to argue that a plurality should decide the presidency? Or are you trying to say that the electoral college did not elect bush? Or that the electoral college did not vote for who they were supposed to? Or that the correct people were not sent to the electoral college?
Because these are very different things. On 6/12/06, Maureen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, you're right, of course, and that's what I meant to say. > However, Bush did not even win by a plurality in 2000, so discussing > whether or not Clinton won is definitely one of Cameron's red > herrings. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:208963 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
