So who's everyone supporting for 2008?

[6thGen]

Ahhhh... isn't it fun to type your insults rather than look someone in the eye with them? It's kind of like being a little desktop satirical cartoonist, only without the humor or creativity.

No, I think I'll save my ideas for some higher discourse. Besides, explaining them to you would be like doing so to a, uh, Newt.

​

OK, professor, are you advocating a simple majority vote? Should we just do away with states all together? Are you advocating central planning? Those should be pretty easy questions for someone obviously as bright and established in his thinking as you. So as to not be too taxing, a simple yes or no will do.

 

[Bob]

I know what you meant. My point is that the Electoral College was meant to a blend of majority and states wills. It was meant to give a voice to both the states and the population. The Electoral College is a relic of a disconnected age, as you seem to be.

If the politicians in Maryland can demonstrate a better way to teach our kids, then best practices should prevail.

"Politics is local" was a guide to getting elected, not governing efficiently.

Wouldn't you agree that given our country is increasingly urbanized, the electoral college is more relevant than ever. With a majority vote, the candidates would focus on the most populated states, and would ignore the rest.

 

[hoover_rc]

Wouldn't you agree that given our country is increasingly urbanized, the electoral college is more relevant than ever. With a majority vote, the candidates would focus on the most populated states, and would ignore the rest.

Is the opposite better? Now they ignore the most populated states because they are not in play. If our country is becoming increasingly urbanized, shouldn't the urban centers have an increasingly greater role in electing a president? Why would anyone really vote in NY and CA when they know the Dems will carry? The popular vote in 2000 would have been even more Gore if they felt like their vote was going to count. We live in a democracy, lets have a popular vote. There is enough of federalism in Congress.

 

[John R]

Speaking of putting the power in the hands of the States, I wonder at what rate would the population increase in California, if California made it legal to possess and smoke marijuana.

denver has. time will tell.

 

[destinconcierge]

Heard a rumor that Bill Clinton will be at Harbordocks in Destin in a couple of weeks - anyone know anything?

See post on Bill Clinton Coming to Destin

 

[Bob]

Is the opposite better? Now they ignore the most populated states because they are not in play. If our country is becoming increasingly urbanized, shouldn't the urban centers have an increasingly greater role in electing a president? Why would anyone really vote in NY and CA when they know the Dems will carry? The popular vote in 2000 would have been even more Gore if they felt like their vote was going to count. We live in a democracy, lets have a popular vote. There is enough of federalism in Congress.

You answered your own question. The electoral college is about balance of power. Balance between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches is the sheer genius of our form of government. No one branch or constituency can easily hold sway. It's why the Articles of Confederation was initially tried. Those forming our government were leery of centralized, urbanized political power. Would you have 2 dozen less populated states ignored because one political party held sway in two states? The founding fathers saw this problem before our time and did not want a country dominated by urban centers. I guess it depends on your vantage point. The media is already dominated by urban society. I would argue New York and California have no problem in the political arena being heard. Between those 2 states, you have the strongest Democratic Presidential candidate and the Speaker of the House. The Dems need not point the finger at the system, but pick stronger candidates with broad appeal. I'm seeing a replay of '00 and '04 coming down the highway. The Dems are going to pick another urban candidate with little appeal in the heartland.

 

[Smiling JOe]

denver has. time will tell.

Right, but don't they have major hoops to jump through, such as medical prescription? California and Oregon also passed medical marijuana, but I think the Feds will not allow the doctors to prescribe in California, or else, they lose their medical license. The FEDs will remove the $$$ from the states who chose to do certain things. Look no further than the way the FED controls the legal drinking age in each state, by limiting or opening the coffers for highways, depending on each State's drinking age.

 

[Chickpea]

The Dems are going to pick another urban candidate with little appeal in the heartland.

Groan!! Unfortunately I think you are right!

 

[The Red Hare]

Urrrmm... new here, but my I humbly suggest a look at www.richardsonforpresident.com

Bill Richardson.

He is currently running in about 4th place (behind John Edwards) - strangely, that's where a young man named Bill Clinton was running about this time in 1991...

If you look at his background, his experience, what he's done as the Governor of New Mexico, what his done as a diplomat recently for our nation, you may be impressed. Unfortunately, he's the Democratic Party's best kept secret.

And yes, Senor Hoover. The Electoral College should be abolished. I thought it was a forgone conclusion after the Bush-Gore debacle but it seems the only thing that will rouse the masses to revolution is if American Idol gets cancelled or even pre-empted...

 

[Bob]

http://www.aim.org/media_monitor/A3548_0_2_0_C/ Nice skeleton in Senor Richardson's Clintonian closet.