Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/05/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The electoral college was designed to pre-empt the popular vote. That's why it was created in the first place. (That is not, however, what the Supreme Court was designed to do. But that's another issue altogether!) It was felt by the founding "fathers" (yay for patriarchy!) that given the population's distance from the centers of power, that there was no way that they could be adequately informed about the suitability of one candidate over another, so the electoral college was devised as a way to make sure that the most populous and well-informed areas of the country, i.e., "cities" would elect the president. You can see how even in those days, the politicians' needs were placed before those of the people. Just focus on the key areas with the largest number of electoral votes (big states, big cities) and you've got the election in the bag. The electoral college is an anachronism. But maybe we've covered this topic already. Probably just before the Lagavulinluggers started one of their famous discussions about scotch a while ago! Kit -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+kitmc=acmefoto.com@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+kitmc=acmefoto.com@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of grduprey@rockwellcollins.com Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 12:48 PM To: lug@leica-users.org Subject: RE: [Leica] Hey, Did I Call YOU a Republican? Not that I want to prolong this thread, but this is not the first time the Electorial college pre-empted the popular vote, although I cannot remember which other election was effected. Also as I remember how this was to work, the Electorial College Vote is the official vote. Although both votes should agree, but it does not always work that way. Gene |---------+--------------------------------------------------------> | | "Kit McChesney" <kitmc@acmefoto.com> | | | Sent by: | | | lug-bounces+grduprey=rockwellcollins.com@leic| | | a-users.org | | | | | | | | | 05/21/2004 01:04 PM | | | Please respond to Leica Users Group | | | | |---------+--------------------------------------------------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------| | | | To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> | | cc: | | Subject: RE: [Leica] Hey, Did I Call YOU a Republican? | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------| Paul-- Thanks for pointing out the truth of who voted, and for whom! Are there really still folks out there who think that Gore got fewer votes than Bush? Puleez! And those are the rough totals! Remember those hanging chads! It isn't the volume of votes that elects the president, as we know. It's the volume in certain key states that does the trick. Remember that good old Electoral College? Ick! I guess it's no mystery who got my vote! Or at least, I assume he got it! Kit -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+kitmc=acmefoto.com@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+kitmc=acmefoto.com@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Paul Hardy Carter Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 10:40 AM To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] Hey, Did I Call YOU a Republican? Actually that's quite interesting. According to your government 50,456,002 people voted for Bush and 50,999,897 voted for Gore. Isn't democracy wonderful! P. At 11:54 am -0400, 21/5/04, MCyclWritr@aol.com wrote: >Does it further amaze you that even fewer Democrats voted for their >candidate? You know, the guy who lost. Whoever he was. > >-Chris Lawson _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information