A Blowout in the Making

[NewGuy]

Well, from what I dug up, which I can't seem to verify with authoritative sources, I found this:

"Despite various criticisms and controversies, the current form of the electoral college has delivered the presidency to the popular and electoral vote winners in 46 out of 50 elections since it became operational in 1804. In the very closely contested 2000 election, for the first time in 112 years, the system resulted in a President and Vice President who received more electoral votes, but fewer popular votes, than the electoral vote runners-up. This event has stimulated renewed congressional and public interest in the question of presidential election reform, particularly electoral college reform. "
-
http://www.ncseonline.org/nle/crsreports/government/gov-39.cfm

Also, there was some information elsewhere stating that in the 1800’s, there were three instances where the Electoral College disagreed with the popular vote.

In 1968, the race would have ended up in congress shy of a few votes for George Wallace. Again in 1976, the electoral vote gave Gerald Ford the victory even though Jimmy Carter one the most popular support.


Do with it what you will.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by NewGuy
1. In regard to the house and senate offices, we all know deals go back and forth and lots of media bias flies to decieve the masses. Of course, the masses still put these people in office, the question is whether or not the chosen ones are there under false pretenses.

2. The majority may be with republicans because of election results, but how many republicans are true republicans without compromise? Compromise makes a republican liberal.

3. Can I name a time when the electoral college went against the votes of the states? -Since I have never bothered to look at the specifics to have dates handy, I will have to look that one up.

It DOES NOT change the reality of the situation of what the requirement IS, however.

1. Congressmen/senators are elected by state and district, so they can afford to be much more conservative or liberal than the President, if their ideologies fit their districts.

2. While I think GOP congressmen should stick to the conservative agenda, I don't think compromise make people "liberal;" it can be a good way to get meaningful legislation passed, if done correctly. I think we would agree, though, that many GOP House members are too willing to stray from the conservative agenda.

3. One elector in 1980 switched his vote from Reagan to Anderson (a third party candidate), if I remember correctly. And while in theory any elector can change his.her vote, in reality, the electors are chosen based on their commitment level to the party and candidate, so such defections are extremely rare.

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
3. One elector in 1980 switched his vote from Reagan to Anderson (a third party candidate), if I remember correctly. And while in theory any elector can change his.her vote, in reality, the electors are chosen based on their commitment level to the party and candidate, so such defections are extremely rare.

It does matter how people vote.

 

[Awbrodeur]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by NewGuy
I hate to take the wind out of sails, but with an electoral college, it doesn't matter how the people vote. There is no requirement for the electoral college to select the person for office that the people want. You are just fed that pablum from the media.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This statment right here is validating a controversial topic that political scientists and elected officials everywhere are trying to change. The peoples vote DOES count! No matter how little you think your one vote counts it still is extremely important to the political race. Perfect example.....Florida 2000. What about that one little vote from the women living down the street, it could have made a massive impact. Every vote matters and counts.

As for the discussion on Bush getting his popularity back in the polls, this is obvious. Bush remained pushed aside as the democrats took the stage for thier nominee race so Kerry became the name of the moment. Bush has now begun to come back publicly and his name will bring him further in the poll ratings. Remember, the American voter is not the most educated, when asked questions about who they support in the presidential race moderate voters will think of the name they have heard the most in the last few weeks, or months. Polls=not reliable.

 

[NewGuy]

Perfect example.....Florida 2000

And just how did the POPULAR vote make the decision?

 

[Merlin1047]

I certainly hope you're correct. But I'm nervous about getting too confident. I believe it was the famous skeptic PT Barnum who said something to the effect that "no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."

Now I think that assessment is a bit harsh, but I have been visiting the MSN Slate site and I'm here to tell you those people are scary. Their INTENSE hatred of Pres. Bush in particular and conservatives in general is surpassed only by their slavish, mindless devotion to ultra-lib ideology. They spout dimocrat dogma as if it were verse from the bible. They have an absolute abiity to ignore facts in favor of the sound-bite du jour. No charge against the Bush administration is too ridiculous or far fetched for them to swear it to be true. One idiot claimed that Pres. Bush once raped a woman then had her killed to cover it up. He later posted a missive in which he speculated that G. Bush Sr. was behind the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan. His "proof" was a claim that Bush Sr. and Hinkley's father had once had business dealings. The posts were bad enough in and of themselves, but the really disgusting aspect was that not a single liberal challenged this moron on his premise.

I don't think that the Bush campaign can afford to take anything for granted. It needs to hammer kerry at every opportunity if for no other reason than to counter the vitriol spewing from the left. If these people ever gain any traction in the credibility department, we're in trouble. Their main weakness is that they are their own worst enemy. Let's hope they never figure that out.

 

[jimnyc]

Welcome to the board, Merlin

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by Merlin1047
I certainly hope you're correct. But I'm nervous about getting too confident. I believe it was the famous skeptic PT Barnum who said something to the effect that "no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."

Good point Merlin, I agree. It is too far from the election to take anything for granted. I do find Morris's insight interesting. He seems to know how the left play politics and how to combat it.

 

[Jownzee29]

Originally posted by Merlin1047
They spout dimocrat dogma as if it were verse from the bible. They have an absolute abiity to ignore facts in favor of the sound-bite du jour. No charge against the Bush administration is too ridiculous or far fetched for them to swear it to be true."

This excerpt particularly caught my eye and got my thinking about democrats. Democratic candidates have a great party to run for because their party members believe anything they here about any opponent of their candidate. I have been watching all the things said about Bush which seem very aggresive but it works. Democrats shouldn't believe everything they hear, be alittle more savvy you are all ruining the election process.

 

[Rosanna730]

The Bush Administration shouldnt believe everything they DONT here. I think republican's facts are a little more mixed then democrats. False information seems to be fueling the republican fire right now and you are in denial about it.

VOTE KERRY!

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Rosanna730
The Bush Administration shouldnt believe everything they DONT here. I think republican's facts are a little more mixed then democrats. False information seems to be fueling the republican fire right now and you are in denial about it.

VOTE KERRY!

 

[Jownzee29]

What is this false information you are refering to could you be more specific. John Kerry will do and say anything to become president. Is that the type of person you really want running the most powerful country in the world. Besides he looks like Skeletor from He-Man

 

[megsand247]

Regarding the fact that Kerry is going to be identified as "the leftist that he is" is no different then the fact that over the past 4 years President SELECT Bush has done nothing but solidify his rightist ways. Yes, America is centrist and the only way to win an election is to capture the median voter, but let's hope the candidates actually take stands on the issues and we don't have another repeat of 2000. I welcome a so called leftist candidate, at least that way what he claims to stand for will remain consistent throughout his term in office. What's worse: leaning one way or another politically or claiming to be central then acting extreme in a majority of the decisions you make once in office?

Maybe Nov 2004 will prove to be the first presidential election Bush actually wins. But don't hold your breathe. I live in a swing state and I'm blasted by nothing but Bush ads... some attacking Kerry and some making him appear to be a normal guy. Both are pretty sickening. If you are breathing you should be able to see through Bush's ads, if not then do America a favor and educate yourself before this November.

P.S. I have yet to see a Kerry ad sponsored by Kerry's campaign. That only adds to the mile long list of reasons to vote Democrat in November.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by megsand247
Regarding the fact that Kerry is going to be identified as "the leftist that he is" is no different then the fact that over the past 4 years President SELECT Bush has done nothing but solidify his rightist ways. Yes, America is centrist and the only way to win an election is to capture the median voter, but let's hope the candidates actually take stands on the issues and we don't have another repeat of 2000. I welcome a so called leftist candidate, at least that way what he claims to stand for will remain consistent throughout his term in office. What's worse: leaning one way or another politically or claiming to be central then acting extreme in a majority of the decisions you make once in office?

Maybe Nov 2004 will prove to be the first presidential election Bush actually wins. But don't hold your breathe. I live in a swing state and I'm blasted by nothing but Bush ads... some attacking Kerry and some making him appear to be a normal guy. Both are pretty sickening. If you are breathing you should be able to see through Bush's ads, if not then do America a favor and educate yourself before this November.

P.S. I have yet to see a Kerry ad sponsored by Kerry's campaign. That only adds to the mile long list of reasons to vote Democrat in November.

 

[Rosanna730]

See

What is this false information you are refering to could you be more specific. John Kerry will do and say anything to become president. Is that the type of person you really want running the most powerful country in the world. Besides he looks like Skeletor from He-Man

Denial. Dont play dumb. I know republicans are good at it (Bush is the best example) but lets not get carried away here. Democrats admit when they are wrong...

 

[Jownzee29]

Democrats admit when they are wrong huh...So I guess thats why Bill Clinton committed perjury and then denied it.

 

[Rosanna730]

actually. its funny you didnt picked up on that seeing as how republicans have been a little "slow" lately.

one question for you...what happened in the end? Im pretty sure Clinton and everyone else knows the truth now, bc eventually, he admitted to it.

We're still waiting on Bush...hopefully he'll be out of office soon so u guys can stop letting him jerk ur chain.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Rosanna730
actually. its funny you didnt picked up on that seeing as how republicans have been a little "slow" lately.

one question for you...what happened in the end? Im pretty sure Clinton and everyone else knows the truth now, bc eventually, he admitted to it.

We're still waiting on Bush...hopefully he'll be out of office soon so u guys can stop letting him jerk ur chain.

English next time, please! Nobody wants to read your incoherent rants.

 

[lilcountriegal]

Uh. Rosanna.... from your typing, it appears you have something stuck on your finger.

Fling it before you type next time, please.

:gross2:

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by megsand247
Regarding the fact that Kerry is going to be identified as "the leftist that he is" is no different then the fact that over the past 4 years President SELECT Bush has done nothing but solidify his rightist ways. Yes, America is centrist and the only way to win an election is to capture the median voter, but let's hope the candidates actually take stands on the issues and we don't have another repeat of 2000. I welcome a so called leftist candidate, at least that way what he claims to stand for will remain consistent throughout his term in office. What's worse: leaning one way or another politically or claiming to be central then acting extreme in a majority of the decisions you make once in office?

America is not centrist. If it was it wouldnt be trending Conservative. We wouldnt have a conservative controled House, Senate, Presidency, and we wouldnt have conservatives gaining ground on the state level as well. Kerry has been labeled the most liberal Senator, not by Bush but by a left wing news outlet. And to think Bush had done nothing but solidify his rightist ways by giving Democrats what they want. IE letting Ted Kennedy write the education bill, Campaign Finance Reform and the Medicare bill to name a few is not only ignorant but silly as well. If Bush has any problems this year its going to be by not being right enough not by being a rightest.

Maybe Nov 2004 will prove to be the first presidential election Bush actually wins. But don't hold your breathe. I live in a swing state and I'm blasted by nothing but Bush ads... some attacking Kerry and some making him appear to be a normal guy. Both are pretty sickening. If you are breathing you should be able to see through Bush's ads, if not then do America a favor and educate yourself before this November.

Your joking arent you? You arent still hung up over the fact that Bush won Florida are you? He won every recount imaginable, even the ones done by the Gore supporters after everything was finished. Bush won. Face it. If calling Kerrys record into play is an attack ad, then we need more of them. The American people deserve to know what the candidates have done with their previous times in office. Problem is you cant tell the difference between attacking someones record and personal attacks such as "Bush is stupid" or "Bush is Hitler" You guys are so quick to call Bush Hitler and in doing so trivialize the lives of millions of people who died in Hitlers death camps and then jump on Bush for an uplifting and inspiring ad that hardly mentions 911, a key event of leadership during the administration. And then you wonder why America is disgusted. Well contrary to your opinion. Americans arent stupid. And they arent fooled by Libs anymore

P.S. I have yet to see a Kerry ad sponsored by Kerry's campaign. That only adds to the mile long list of reasons to vote Democrat in November.

So what your saying is not knowing anything about Kerry's agenda is something that gives you more reason to vote for him? How utterly silly. Id love to see your list of reasons to vote for Kerry. We had a thread on it not to long ago. Not one person could name ONE reason to vote FOR Kerry. So i doubt the list is that long.