> I am not talking to you like you are stupid, I am saying that the > government was setup this way for a reason. And I don't see how things have > changed over the past 230 Years that make these things any different. The > Federal Government has become more powerful than originally intended, this > I disagree with.
i cannot see how people electing the president directly makes the federal government more powerful at all. > We have a number of officials that are directly elected by the people, Only > one isn't. The president. There are a bunch who arent' elected at all but dont' get me started on that (I believe supreme court justices should be ELECTED) > >And I disagree with this practice. It means that my democratic vote in my > >republican state is completely useless. > > I don't like the original idea either. But the states have that choice. > First challenge the state. I would rather get rid of an outdated concept. > >I dont' agree with forcing me to speak with the voice of the crazed, alaskan > >conspiracy theorists, thank you. > > I am not saying you should, But don't blame the electoral college for that. > Blame the people. If there was no electoral college then every vote would really count. I like that idea. > > >I hate to be Ben Braver, but its LOSES. Looses is different. > > Yea, I can't proofread, it always looks correct when I read it. > I apologize for that. I hate when people do that to me. I was pissed at you.. > The right of the people to elect a person that has the support of the > majority of the people who voted. The right of the people to have a > candidate that will focus on the nation, and not just one that will deal > with the populated areas. I don't think that we have"a person who has the support of the majority of the people who voted" in office right now, so your logic doesn't hold water for me. > Any person can win a popular election if they concentrated their efforts on > the areas with the highest population. Just look at the last election. If > you look at a map of the US broken down by district, the area covered by > the people who voted for bush was far greater than that of Gore. > > With a popular only election that majority of the area of the country could > end up not having a vote, because the well populated areas swing the vote. EACH person would have a vote. Which is how i think an election should work. But thats just me. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_community Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com
