Post Reply 
Canadian trucker fined for smoking on the job
10-16-2009, 03:09 PM
Post: #51
Canadian trucker fined for smoking on the job
Stormlover Wrote:No, the way it was envisioned by our founding fathers. That's NOT how things are running now. Corruption, lifetime poltiticians that don't answer to their constituents, but the special interests that fund them, more and more government control of things...that's how it is now.

[Image: Jesus+Facepalm.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
10-16-2009, 08:05 PM
Post: #52
Canadian trucker fined for smoking on the job
Windwatcher Wrote:Those days are over, Moon. "Rural" America is a thing of the past. We have transportation and mass media and internet.
Now, if they don't get out and vote, that's another story.

Wrong I live in rural America and we don't want the city people telling us what to do.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
10-16-2009, 09:22 PM
Post: #53
Canadian trucker fined for smoking on the job
Wounded Bird Wrote:Wrong I live in rural America and we don't want the city people telling us what to do.

You misunderstand me, woundedbird. I live in what was until very recently a rural area....my point is that we no longer are isolated by lack of communications like in the 1800's and early 1900's. We are no longer kept in the dark simply because we do not have access to information. That was the original purpose of the electoral college, from my understanding, to "represent" people who couldn't get to the polls to vote, or lacked the technology to have their votes counted.
I feel that mainstream, rural America is NOT being represented properly and the urban areas are deciding our elections.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
10-16-2009, 09:39 PM
Post: #54
Canadian trucker fined for smoking on the job
excerpt:

"One aspect of the electoral system that is not mandated in the constitution is the fact that the winner takes all the votes in the state. Therefore it makes no difference if you win a state by 50.1% or by 80% of the vote you receive the same number of electoral votes. This can be a recipe for one individual to win some states by large pluralities and lose others by small number of votes, and thus this is an easy scenario for one candidate winning the popular vote while another winning the electoral vote. This winner take all methods used in picking electors has been decided by the states themselves. This trend took place over the course of the 19th century."

This explains (in someone else's words) why I personally do not think it is a fair way to elect a president.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)