Precisely!No change in the outcome of the presidential race for this year, but in 2 more years maybe the R and D candidates will actually propose something to get back all of the L votes from this year.

Return to “Electorial college strategy in 08 vote Barr”
Precisely!No change in the outcome of the presidential race for this year, but in 2 more years maybe the R and D candidates will actually propose something to get back all of the L votes from this year.
I would go back there with my rubber stamped document and tell that professor off!Notwithstanding these occasional stirrings of interest, the amendment was largely forgotten until 1982, when Gregory Watson, an economics student at the University of Texas at Austin, ran across it while looking for a research topic. Watson wrote a paper arguing that because the amendment did not include a time limit for ratification, it was still in play. He got a C.
You make a decent case, but you conveniently left out that second part of the same sentence. My simple answer to the flaw in this logic is the 2004 election. Shoot me down for using wikipedia, but their numbers state Bush netted 62,040,610 votes and Kerry 59,028,444. Thats is a difference of 3,012,166 votes a narrow margin when you are talking about 121+ million votes. If you ask me, thats about as middle of the road as you get. Based on that phenomenon, I don't see how your argument for the electoral college makes much sense....or simply because a national election, in the time of oil lamps and quill pens, was just impractical.
What I advocate is one vote, one person. Tally up the entire country, see who wins. Doesn't matter where you live then AND your vote actually counts. But I am hijacking this thread with the issue. To get back to the topic, I did vote for Bob Barr this afternoon! So at least its done.Liberty wrote:The fear is if we just made it a pure popular vote the folks on the coasts would get to decide who gets to be president. The smaller (Red states) would have less influence.kalipsocs wrote:Why? How is it a fair election that a few select people decide the next president than the total count of votes for the entire country? Not to mention no one is riding on horseback as fast as they can to get the vote in! Times change and its hardly fair that Pennsylvania, Ohio, and a couple other states get to choose the next president.