Wow, so much for the free country part

[Wagner]

Remember when you were little (if you lived in the USA) you were told in school that in American anyone could be anything and that you could be the President some day if you wanted to, as long as you were over 35 and a US Citizen...well......not true....pop bubble now.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/....sc/index.html


Colbert, who of course is a comedian mocking the process, was shot down by the DNC. How, not because he didn't provide the requirement for candidacy but because they didn't feel it was appropriate. Glad they were allowed to decide. I don't think Hilary Clinton (wife of a President, and wanna-be junior Senator that moved from her real home state to NY with the sole purpose of political lime light) should be taken seriously as a real candidate...so where can I vote to have her blocked from any ticket?

[Best Man]

I take it you are a republican?

[Wagner]

You would be wrong.

[X5Flyboy]

That's only if you 'buy' into the 2 party system - I believe ALL political donations should go into one fund, then divided equally to all candidates - miminize the party system - let all the candidates present their ideas on equal footing - top 4 votegetters make it to the national ballot - no polls or voting results until ALL voting is done (guam?) - vice president gets selected by the president after the election (before panders to votes & money, afterward, we may get better a person)

[Eric5273]

Originally Posted by X5Flyboy

That's only if you 'buy' into the 2 party system - I believe ALL political donations should go into one fund, then divided equally to all candidates - miminize the party system - let all the candidates present their ideas on equal footing - top 4 votegetters make it to the national ballot - no polls or voting results until ALL voting is done (guam?) - vice president gets selected by the president after the election (before panders to votes & money, afterward, we may get better a person)

Congratulations! You just described the system that exists in most democracies in the world.

In case you have forgotten, here in the US we do not vote for the president. We have political parties that select their own candidates, and then we vote for deligates who then vote for the President. As we saw in 2000, the candidate who gets the most votes does not necessarily win. Gore won the popular vote, but lost the electoral vote count.

[X5Flyboy]

I still want voting by states - the arguement over Gore's "winning" the "popular" vote would have candidates stumping in only 13-14 states for the "popular" vote vs campaigning in all the states - A friend of mine suggested they could not spend any more than what the job paid - I would at least require them to campaign in all 50 states, instead of just filing registration fees - maybe a debate in each state

[Eric5273]

Originally Posted by X5Flyboy

I still want voting by states - the arguement over Gore's "winning" the "popular" vote would have candidates stumping in only 13-14 states for the "popular" vote vs campaigning in all the states

If that is a valid argument, then how about this one:

What about someone who lives in Upstate New York, 300 miles from NYC, who complains that the candidates only campaign in the NYC area where all the people are and not upstate. After all, all votes in New York State count the same.

Maybe that person will complain that Upstate New York should have their own electoral system seperate from NYC.

Where do you stop dividing?

The solution is just to count the whole country as one large territory. Because if you are going to divide it up into states, then why not divide each state up even into regions. Or how about divide it up into counties. Or maybe in the case where one side of a county has a much higher population than the other side, then divide it up into towns. When does it stop??

The same argument you are making could be made by anyone in any of these situations.

[X5Flyboy]

maybe a good arguement for president - but constitution recognizes "states" vs cities, counties, regions - but it's still the electoral college that "elects" the president, then electoral votes would have to be divided upon popular vote rather than state majority - and then, given a multiple choice for president, who would "win" if there is no 50+% winner? - how much "power" do we give the electoral college representatives to negotiate a "winner" - time to get rid of the electoral college?

[Tainui]

Since elections in the country for the general populace are basically popularity contests, I don't really know if people who get heartbroken over the OC or American Idol should be voting for our president.

I think it was George Carlin who said, "Imagine how dumb the average person is and know that half of this country isn't as smart as him."

But as a side note, NYC (its 5 boroughs) SHOULD be its own state. It has its own city taxes and systems. Wow would people come unglued if all the money NYC taxes generates stayed within its boarders.

[Eric5273]

Originally Posted by X5Flyboy

time to get rid of the electoral college?

Yes!

Most people don't know, but in the first several Presidential elections, the public did not even vote. The state governments decided which candidate they would support and sent their deligates to vote that way. I think it wasn't until the 1820s that the public actually got to vote for President, and even then it was only white male property owners who were allowed to vote. Those who think the founding fathers were so big on the idea of "democracy" are mistaken.