>So you are suggesting that if there was 1% voter turn out, the >election would still be considered legit and the elected would have >claim to be the legitimate leaders of our government?
>Travis I don't have an example of 1%, but an example in this argument was given in "New Libertarian" of a Los Angeles citywide election in which the general election turnout was 8%. The writer pointed out it was enough of a mandate that the mayor & council elected that term installed rent controls. I think if turnouts declined to 1% AND STAYED THERE over several elections, SOMEthing would be "done" about it. However, I'm sure the claim of legitimacy of the elections would be upheld. In general, analysts in the USA explain low turnouts compared to those in other democracies by the electorate's being generally satisfied in the USA. Polls bear that analysis out; election turnouts in the USA rise & fall inversely with indicators of satisfaction. Consider corporate elections. Many's the time that hardly any of the stockholders send in their proxies. See anyone disputing the legitimacy of their corporate governance on that account? In Your Sly Tribe, Robert _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
