No Politics But Vote

thcri · Oct 30, 2004

( Where does it say the rich folks in the big cities are smarter than us folks out in the country?

Boy, I leave for a couple hours, and there's 22 new posts to this thread! /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif )

Having a business with over 70 employees, I will take a farm kid long before I will take an educated kid!! No questions asked. Now another pre=requisite if just city folk applying is a paper boy /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif.

You see I figure it if a boy can milk cows every day twice a day or do a paper route every day and hold that job for some time that tells me HE IS RESPONSIBLE and will show up for work everyday and when something breaks down won't walk away from the problem.

murph

Alan L. · Oct 30, 2004

daedong, I think our founder fathers got it right. This is a large country, with a diverse populace. Cultures vary by area, particularly rural vs urban, south vs north, etc.

The large population centers have large concentrations of people with the same culture, economic background, and political beliefs. If the vote was strictly a poplular vote, then those of us in the south, in rural areas, and with different backgrounds would never have a chance to affect the outcome.

Its not as though every state gets an equal vote. Our legislature is made of (1) the house of representatives which is made up of I think 436 congressmen. The more populous a state is, the more U.S. congressmen that state has, and each congressman has a particular district within that state that he represents and only voters from a district elect that congressman. And (2) the Senate. There are exactly 2 senators from each state (total of 100), and they are elected statewide by each state. All law has to pass both "congress" and the "senate", and then must be sigened by the president to become law.

The electoral college uses the 536 number, allocated by the number each state has in terms of congressmen, plus another 2 I think for the District of Columbia (where Washington is), so the presidential winner has to be awarded the majority of the 538 electoral votes to become president. If a candidate wins a state, he gets all their electoral votes in the vast majority of the states. For instance the winner of California gets 55 (the biggest) and Texas gets 34.

In 2000 it all came down to Florida which has 27 votes. Bush officially won the state by 300 or so votes out of how ever many million.

Sorry if I insult you with this civics lesson, but I certainly don't know anything about how the government of Austrialia is set up.

The U.S. stands for "United States", and thats why we have a republic and not a true democracy.

Being from Texas, and living in a rural area, I am of course not objective on this subject. However if my guy wins the popular vote and loses the electoral college, then my guy lost, and I'm OK with that. We'll get em next time.

OkeeDon · Oct 30, 2004

However you look at it, there's 300 million people in this country, and those are the BEST two people we can find to run for the highest office in the land??? 

Well, let's see. I haven't bothered to look up the exact numbers for the things I'm positing, so there may be some opportunity for quibbling, but I think the gist is in the right direction.

300 million people. About half of them are too young. That leaves 150 million. About a quarter of them were not born in this country, making them ineligible, lowering the total to 75 million. Over half of them are women, and the country is apparently not quite ready to elect one of them, yet, so we're left with 32 million. Half of them are Republican, and they didn't bother to look for anyone new, so our pool is now 16 million. 25% of them are in jail or were once felons, so there's 12 million left.

About 10% are members of some fringe party which doesn't really have a chance, no matter how good they are. Of the 11 million left, 10,999,987 have one of the following: a skeleton in their closet, a questionable financial dealing, a messy divorce, a history of using drugs, treatment for mental problems, or they simply are too short or have the wrong haircut.

That leaves 13 people, one of whom is the Republican nominee. The other 12 ran for the Democratic nomination, and one emerged, not necessarily the best. So, the more accurate question is, out of 13 people, are these the best 2? Maybe, probably. And now, you have to pick one of the two. That may be the lesser of two evils, but the result is that the better man should win -- but may not, due to either, or a combination of, stupidity and election fraud.

The important thing is that regardless of how we got here, you absolutely should, even go so far as to say you must, choose one of the two.

There, I managed to pull that off without a single hint of which way I favor...

AndyM · Oct 30, 2004

"The important thing is that regardless of how we got here, you absolutely should, even go so far as to say you must, choose one of the two." 

I've had a history of voting for third party candidates that were more suited for what I stand for than the two major party candidates. However, this election is too important and will be too close for me to do that this time. I am voting for one of the two major candidates.

 "There, I managed to pull that off without a single hint of which way I favor..." 

Yep, these political threads work pretty well when we don't mention the names of political parties or candidates!

YanmarFever · Oct 30, 2004

Don
That was the best explanation of the this mess
I have ever read so far
So I guess that just leaves Pat Buchanan left to run this country heh? /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
Ernie

OkeeDon · Oct 30, 2004

I've had a history of voting for third party candidates that were more suited for what I stand for than the two major party candidates.

Been there, done that, got the tee shirt. But, I think you're absolutely correct. While I emphatically believe in the strategy of voting to send a message, this time it's too close to waste a single vote. Regardless of which way you vote, the results this time will affect you more than perhaps any time in our history; certainly it will affect more people.

So I, who have been a registered independent (under a variety of labels, most recently non-partisan in Florida, but still essentially independent) for more than 43 years, changed my registration this year to reflect a political party (not saying which one here on TBN). It was simply time to stand up and be counted, as a registrant as well as a voter. I may change back to non-partisan as soon as this election is over...

AndyM · Oct 31, 2004

"While I emphatically believe in the strategy of voting to send a message, this time it's too close to waste a single vote." 

I didn't vote for them to send a message. I voted for them because I honestly thought they were the best qualified for the job. I voted for them with the high hopes that millions of other voters would also vote for them.

This time is different-- the candidate I felt is best for the job is not on the ballot in this state, added to the fact that none of the third party candidates have a chance of getting more than one percent of the popular vote. As much as I hate to say it, we should vote for who we think is the best of the two major candidates this election, even though the lesser of two evils is still evil.

bgott · Oct 31, 2004

"The only thing I have to say is, "GET OUT AND VOTE". "

Gee, I thought it was "VOTE EARLY AND VOTE OFTEN"! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

TWINKLE_TOES · Oct 31, 2004

A good example occured recently in King county, Western Washington. The King county council is composed of 13 council members. 7 representing urban districts and 6 representing rural districts. A "Critical Areas Ordanance" was passed which restricts rural property owners with greater than 5 acres from use of 65% of their land, without any compensation. This portion of their land must be allowed to return to it's natural state. Those people in urban areas are virtually uneffected. So in the name of environmental protection the rual property owners pay the entire bill. The passing vote was 7 urban council members yes, 6 rural council members no. This will most certainly end up in the courts as a violation of our 5th and 14th amendment rights. The council members fron the rural areas represent ~ 90% of the land area. (if your interested in more information or can't believe what I have stated, do a search on "King County"CAO)

_RaT_ · Oct 31, 2004

"for more than 43 years, changed my registration this year to reflect a political party (not saying which one here on TBN)."

Smart choice Don. I think most of us prefer not to know that aspect of peoples lives. It's disappoiniting to me when a celebrity type comes out wearing his/her stripes on their sleeves with such animosity toward the candidate competing against theirs. I just don't care for it. Good luck with the process down in Florida, I hope it all goes well. Best wishes to your health as well. Rat...