The biggest loser in the recent election was...

[RC]

Treebeau!!

OUTSTANDING!!!

[haggis]

GC,

"Only if that process ends in a tie (and how remote is that possibility?) should the House of Representatives get involved."

Both 1960 and 2000 would have gone to the House based on popular vote alone, and it was very probable that 1976 would have gone to the House as well.

Popular vote would essentially disenfranchise 32 states.

You’ll have to come up with better reasons than the one you proposed. I’ll chip in with two, including the “popular vote” you espouse.

Adopt a representational Electoral College that divides the EC votes proportionately based on the popular vote in that state?

Electoral College

Colorado Electoral College Reform Initiative
would allocate the state's 9 electoral votes proportionately to each candidate's popular vote.

Currently the candidate who wins a plurality of the popular vote gets all of the state's electors, as is the case in 47 other states and the District of Columbia. (Maine and Nebraska allocate 2 electoral votes to the statewide winner and the remaining votes by congressional district, though neither has had a split since adopting this method.)

What would happen if every state adopted the proposed Colorado system? For one thing, "swing" states would be a thing of the past; the difference between carrying Iowa and losing it by a small plurality would be 1 electoral vote (4-3 vs. 3-4) rather than 7. This would benefit large states at the expense of small ones. It's a lot easier to shift 3.2% of the vote in New York (which has 31 electoral votes) than 25% in New Hampshire (4).

It would also increase the importance of third parties, thereby possibly pushing the major parties to extremes. No third-party candidate has carried a state since George Wallace in 1968, but under a proportional system for choosing electors, several would have won electoral votes.

In the 2000 election, if all states followed the proposed Colorado system, Ralph Nader would have gotten 6 electoral votes (2 from California and 1 each from Massachusetts, Ohio, New York and Texas). Gore would have outpolled Bush, 268-264, but neither candidate would have had a 270-vote majority. If Gore was unable to persuade two Nader electors to break ranks and vote for him--which presumably would have entailed policy concessions to their far-left agenda--the election would have been thrown to the House.

In 1992 the result would also have been an Electoral College deadlock, with Bill Clinton having only 236 electoral votes. And it also appears, using the above formula, the House also would have selected the president in 1948 and 1968.

Election by popular vote?

At the minimum, most of the ties mentioned above netted the winner less than 50% of the vote, but even clear two party races would have been too close to call nationally.

The 1960 race between Kennedy and Nixon was so close it would have gone to the House for resolution.

Note: Some historians now believe that had Nixon fought the vote count as Gore did in 2000, he would have been president. Lots of voter shenanigans around that year.

Maybe (and only “maybe”) the EC could be updated or modified to reflect the changes that our founders couldn’t plan for in 1776-87, but there are other areas we could start in first that would be less possible of creating “unintended consequences.”

I suspect that we are stuck with the EC being the “most fair” method we have now for electing presidents.

Sorry

[piqaboo]

Originally posted by RichC:
Piq,

And because of that what she pays in taxes to Altoid's school district will not even come close to providing actual fiscal support.

On our tax bills in Wisconsin, everything that our property tax goes to is listed with the amounts that go there. These things include schools, parks, garbage pickup, our conservation district, among others. There is actually nothing that I'd want to cut out. I'm not sure how I'd feel about my neighbors paying a fraction of what I pay for these services, just because they've lived there a long time.

In the parts of SD where I;ve lived, we get billed for water, sewage, trash separately - not part of our taxes. So we all pay the same. Even tho some folks generate a lot more trash than others.

Re schools, you've hit on another pet peeve.
I dont think local taxes should be for local schools. I think it should all go into a pot and be split equally, statewide.

[piqaboo]

Originally posted by barfle:
Piq, I wasn't trying to pick on California particularly, it's just the case I'm most familiar with. I lived in California (Anaheim and Orange) from 1959 to 2001, so I am also familiar with former governor Davis's inability to deal with the electricity issues, and have received the benefits of prop 13. And I noted, even while I was there, that the ballot measures were going to cause a crisis someday. Prop 13 really only affected county revenues, though, not state revenues (although Sacramento did send a lot of money out trying to make up for the shortfall in the counties). I also remember 3% sales taxes, although they were 4% by the time I started working in retail and adding it to every customer's receipt.

So far, I haven't seen Louisiana try to recall their governor.

Well, we are cutting edge. :p

Sales tax is well above 4%.

And yes, we do tend to vote to spend and vote not to collect money. Dangerous. This state with all its 'hardware' advantages, should be rich, not struggling.

[shostakovich]

From Shapley: "Shos,

RE:No Fan of Ron Paul

Ron Paul is the closest thing to a ture Libertarian we have in Congress. He believes strongly in working within the framework of the Constitution as written, and in maintaining limits on the powers of the Federal Government. It is intirely understandable that he hails from fiercly independent Texas. He doesn't want to see the Federal government assume powers that rightfully belong to the States, and to the people.

I thought that meant something to you.

V/R
Shapley
-------------------------------------------------------
Hi Shap. I'm not libertarian, or conservative, or liberal except as the issue dictates for me. In this case I know nothing of Ron Paul. I was contesting what he said.

Barfle, we do have different ideas about what congress should be doing. And sometime we're aligned. I liked this line: They should have stopped writing at the end of "Congress shall make no law."
Shos

[shostakovich]

I liked T'was the Night After Election Day. I also thought that BigJon's quotes poking fun of "democracy" were pretty good. I think most of us realize we don't have a democracy. If all major issues were put to national referenda annually we'd be a lot closer. That ain't gonna happen.

As for popular vs. electoral voting, much has been said already. Nobody should confuse counting the popular vote with "democracy". The vote, popular or electoral, generally boils down to 2 presidential candidates for whom the public has had damn little to do with selecting.
Shos

[haggis]

"I think most of us realize we don't have a democracy."

I would like to believe so, but recent events convince me that many misguided Americans have never learned that we don't live in a democracy.

I am, however, gratified that you understand that!

[barfle]

Sales tax is well above 4%.

As I recall, the state sales tax is 6.25%, with various local governments adding to that. The number might be off by a little, but now it's at least DOUBLE what it was when there were half as many people in California. Clearly, the influence of governments in people's lives is increasing - something I feel is not good.

This state with all its 'hardware' advantages, should be rich, not struggling.

I fully agree, and many people in California are doing quite well. But you will note that you provided the reason for the struggle in your previous sentences: "And yes, we do tend to vote to spend and vote not to collect money. Dangerous."

[GreatCarouser]

Originally posted by Haggis:
"I think most of us realize we don't have a democracy."

I would like to believe so, but recent events convince me that many misguided Americans have never learned that we don't live in a democracy.

I am, however, gratified that you understand that!

Well now we're in real trouble if there's any truth to the following e-mail I received this morning:

"To the citizens of the United States of America,

In the light of your failure to elect a suitable President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective today. Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchical duties over all states, commonwealths and other territories. Except Utah, which she does not fancy. Your new prime minister (The Right Honourable Tony Blair, MP for the 97.85% of you who have until now been unaware that there is a world outside your borders) will appoint a minister for America without the need for further elections. Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire will be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed. To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect:

1. You should look up "revocation" in the Oxford English Dictionary. Then look up "aluminium". Check the pronunciation guide. You will be amazed
at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it. The letter 'U' will be reinstated in words such as 'favour' and 'neighbour', skipping the letter 'U' is nothing more than laziness on your part. Likewise, you will learn to spell 'doughnut' without skipping half the letters. You will end your love affair with the letter 'Z' (pronounced 'zed' not 'zee') and the suffix "ize" will be replaced by the suffix "ise". You will learn that the suffix 'burgh is pronounced 'burra' e.g. Edinburgh.

You are welcome to respell Pittsburgh as 'Pittsberg' if you can't cope with correct pronunciation. Generally, you should raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels. Look up "vocabulary". Using the same twenty-seven words interspersed with filler noises such as "like" and "you know" is an unacceptable and inefficient form of communication. Look up "interspersed".
There will be no more 'bleeps' in the Jerry Springer show. If you're not old enough to cope with bad language then you shouldn't have chat shows. When you learn to develop your vocabulary then you won't have to use bad language as often.

2. There is no such thing as "US English". We will let Microsoft know on your behalf. The Microsoft spell-checker will be adjusted to take account of the reinstated letter 'u' and the elimination of "-ize".

3. You should learn to distinguish the English and Australian accents. It really isn't that hard. English accents are not limited to Cockney, upper-class twit or Mancunian (Daphne in Frasier). You will also have to learn how to understand regional accents - Scottish dramas such as "Taggart" will no longer be broadcast with subtitles. While we're talking about regions, you must learn that there is no such place as Devonshire in England. The name of the county is "Devon". If you persist in calling it Devonshire, all American States will become "shires" e.g. Texasshire, Floridashire, Louisianashire.

4. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as the good guys. Hollywood will be required to cast English actors to play English characters. British sit-coms such as "Men Behaving Badly" or "Red Dwarf" will not be re-cast and watered down for a wishy-washy American audience who can't cope with the humour of occasional political incorrectness.

5. You should relearn your original national anthem, "God Save the Queen", but only after fully carrying out task 1. We would not want you to get confused and give up half way through.

6. You should stop playing American "football". There is only one kind
of football. What you refer to as American "football" is not a very good game. The 2.15% of you who are aware that there is a world outside your borders may have noticed that no one else plays "American" football. You will no longer be allowed to play it, and should instead play proper football. Initially, it would be best if you played with the girls. It is a difficult game. Those of you brave enough will, in time, be allowed to play rugby (which is similar to American "football", but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full kevlar body armour like nancies). We are hoping to get together at least a US rugby sevens side by 2005. You should stop playing baseball. It is not reasonable to host an event called the 'World Series' for a game, which is not played outside of America. Since only 2.15% of you are aware that there is a world beyond your borders, your error is understandable. Instead of baseball, you will be allowed to play a girls' game called "rounders" which is baseball without fancy team strip, oversized gloves, collector cards or hotdogs.

7. You should declare war on Quebec and France, using nuclear weapons if they give you any merde. The 97.85% of you who were not aware that there is a world outside your borders should count yourselves lucky. The Russians have never been the bad guys. "Merde" is French for "5hit". You will no longer be allowed to own or carry guns. You will no longer be allowed to own or carry anything more dangerous in public than a vegetable peeler. Because we don't believe you are sensible enough to handle potentially dangerous items, you will require a permit if you wish to carry a vegetable peeler in public.

8. July 4th is no longer a public holiday. November 2nd will be a new national holiday, but only in England. It will be called "Indecisive Day".

9. All American cars are hereby banned. They are crap and it is for your own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what we mean. All road intersections will be replaced with roundabouts. You will start driving on the left with immediate effect. At the same time, you will go metric with immediate effect and without the benefit of conversion tables. Roundabouts and metrication will help you understand the British sense of humour.

10. You will learn to make real chips. Those things you call French fries are not real chips. Fries aren't even French; they are Belgian though 97.85% of you (including the guy who discovered fries while in Europe) are not aware of a country called Belgium. Those things you insist on calling potato chips are properly called "crisps". Real chips are thick cut and fried in animal fat. The traditional accompaniment to chips is beer, which should be served warm and flat. Waitresses will be trained to be more aggressive with customers.

11. As a sign of penance 5 grams of sea salt per cup will be added to all tea made within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, this quantity to be doubled for tea made within the city of Boston itself.

12. The cold tasteless stuff you insist on calling beer is not actually beer at all, it is lager. From November 1st only proper British Bitter will be referred to as "beer", and European brews of known and accepted provenance will be referred to as "Lager". The substances formerly known as "American Beer" will henceforth be referred to as "near-frozen knat's urine", with the exception of the product of the American Budweiser company whose product will be referred to as "weak near-frozen knat's urine". This will allow true Budweiser (as manufactured for the last 1000 years in Pilsen, Czech Republic) to be sold without risk of confusion.

13. From December 1st the UK will harmonise petrol (or "gasoline" as you will be permitted to keep calling it until April 1st 2005) prices with the former USA. The UK will harmonise its prices to those of the former USA and the Former USA will, in return, adopt UK petrol prices (roughly $6/US gallon- get used to it).

14. You will learn to resolve personal issues without using guns,lawyers or therapists. The fact that you need so many lawyers and therapists shows that you're not adult enough to be independent. Guns should only be handled by adults. If you're not adult enough to sort things out without suing someone or speaking to a therapist then you're not grown up enough to handle a gun.

15. Please tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us crazy.

16. Tax collectors from Her Majesty's Government will be with you shortly to ensure the acquisition of all revenues due (backdated to 1776).

Thank you for your co-operation."

Good Heavens! What next?

[Shapley]

GC,

That was produced in 2000. It really doesn't fit with the current, non-contested election.

It is still humourous, though!

V/R
Shapley

[GreatCarouser]

Re: 'non-contested election'

Six prominent members of Congress have requested an investigation into the integrity of the vote. The decision could come as soon as Monday.

I know all who are interested in stamping out 'voter fraud' will join me in signing the petition calling for this investigation at Investigate the vote

[Shapley]

GC,

I'm not aware of any great number of voting irregularities in this election. Have you heard something I haven't?

Both parties had large numbers of poll watchers at traditionally "questionable" polling places to guard against irregularities. I haven't heard that they have reported more than the usual amount of anomolies.

V/R
Shapley

P.S. Six prominent members of Congress have requested an investigation into the integrity of the vote. You can probably find that many "prominent members of Congress" willing to investigate whether Martian global warming is the result of George Bush' unwillingness to sign the Kyoto Accord.

<small>[ 11-12-2004, 02:23 PM: Message edited by: Shapley ]</small>

[haggis]

Considering that Kerry had 10,000 lawyers getting paid by the hour ready to charge in to examine any hint of wrong doing and that they weren't dispatched leads me to conclude the Kerry camp didn't think there was an issue.

I'm actually for a recount in every sttate of the union, twice, I want the Democrats to spend the next four years convinced they won the election!!!

That means they will figure their message was the right one and trot it out again in 2008.

[GreatCarouser]

GC,

I'm not aware of any great number of voting irregularities in this election. Have you heard something I haven't?

Go here for starters:
Voting discrepancies

The author is on the faculty of The University of Pennsylvania.

I'm actually for a recount in every sttate of the union, twice, I want the Democrats to spend the next four years convinced they won the election!!!

That means they will figure their message was the right one and trot it out again in 2008.

Yes, Democrats may have to settle for a 'moral victory'. The truth of the message won't change just because some folks don't buy it. Did Galileo's forced recanting of his theories change the fact that the earth revolves around the sun? Bush lied about Iraq and WMD's. The administration lied about 9/11 and mishandled all phases of the 'war on terror' since. He's destroyed the budget and will destroy Social Security just to prove 'that it wasn't working'. The 'beneficiaries' of this will be the next generation and perhaps the one after.

I'll remind you, Haggis, in 1964 the neoconservative wing of the Republican Party suffered the worst defeat ever (up to that time) in a Presidential election. That philosophy is what drives and controls the Republican Party now. It is thriving. One might argue it has been thriving since Reagan in 1980. It has also created the deepest schism in the country since the Civil War. Mr. Bush either doesn't realize this or doesn't care. He is too much a servant of his masters.

I leave you with this:
Dog training

[haggis]

GC,
man, you're really going to be bitter in 2009 when Jeb Bush is sworn in!

[haggis]

" Smiley's People

Consider these two lists of occupations:

A
Actor
Lawyer
Teacher
Writer

B
Business Owner
Engineer
Physician
Soldier

Now ask yourself these questions:

1. In which occupations are earnings fundamentally dependent on the ability to tell a story well?

2. In which occupations are earnings fundamentally dependent on the ability to perceive the facts of a given situation clearly?

3. Which occupations place a higher premium on decisive action?

4. What political parties do you associate with each list of occupations?


The Democratic Party has evolved into a coalition of relatively articulate people whose daily lives are not strongly tethered to reality. It is in large measure a party of glib, silly people. (In the cases of Dan Rather and Walter Cronkite, that may be an excessively charitable assessment.)

Novelist Jane Smiley's recent and widely noticed bit of splenetic foolishness is a particularly apt example of what I'm talking about, although nearly any article in Slate could serve my purposes equally well. Having reflected for over a day on the historical forces represented by the Republicans' across-the-board victory, Ms. Smiley appears to have found its direct antecedent in Quantrill's Raid, a terrorist atrocity of 1862. (I am not making this up.) Presumably in Smiley's world the electoral effects of September 11 will begin to manifest themselves sometime around the year 2146.

Since Smiley's novels are not nearly as humorless and idiotic as her political musings, the deficiencies in her political thought cannot convincingly be attributed to severe mental or emotional disability. And yet her political analysis resembles the lunatic ravings of a person who's been in solitary confinement for an extended period. Or, what is nearly the same thing, she sounds like a typical poster at Democratic Underground.

I doubt that Jane Smiley has discussed politics with a Republican other than one of her relatives (whom she describes as "not ignorant, ... just greedy and full of classic Republican feelings of superiority" [sic]) in a very long time, if ever. She probably thinks that she doesn't know any Republicans, since few rational people would be so foolish as to knowingly flip the switch on her rage machine. To employ a little lit-crit jargon, in Smiley's world Republicans are the Other--alien savages who must be subdued in defense of a superior culture.

Jane Smiley and her ilk do indeed live in a sort of solitary confinement of their own choosing. They live in a realm of talk, where the winning arguments are not those that are the most firmly rooted in facts and logic, but the ones that are the most intricately crafted. They are critics, not doers, for in the realm of talk actions are only valuable as subjects for commentary. Guessing is what must be done by doers; second-guessing is the province of talkers.

The election just concluded was at its base a clash between the realm of talk and the realm of action. At a time when the will to act has rarely been more vital, the nation chose wisely. If there is a logical explanation for the vituperation of Smiley's people, it must be that they have caught a fleeting glimpse of their own irrelevance reflected in the election returns. On the other hand, they just might be crazy. After all, that wouldn't impede their ability to earn a living in the realm of talk."

[Serenity]

Judging by your posts, I would place you in the "A group". Are you a Closet Democrat?

[Selma in Sandy Eggo]

Can I be "B" group? Even if I now mostly write?

I spent a long time fixing aircraft and electronics - do old mechanics turned tech writer still count as reality-based?

[Serenity]

Selma, he ran away. I'm not a regular poster, I post on off-work hours. I'm relegated to "Post-scavenger".

[barfle]

Originally posted by The Great Carouser:
I'll remind you, Haggis, in 1964 the neoconservative wing of the Republican Party suffered the worst defeat ever (up to that time) in a Presidential election. That philosophy is what drives and controls the Republican Party now.

Anyone who considers Barry Goldwater to be in the existing crowd of thieves who have stolen and bastardized the term "conservative" needs a serious history lesson.

While I'm not going to debate that election again (and I remember it well), anyone running against the memory of the assassinated (and practically sainted) Jack Kennedy couldn't have helped but have gone down to defeat. Unfortunately, Lyndon Johnson took the oval office instead of JFK's ghost.

I don't know if Goldwater could have beaten an alive and humanly flawed Jack Kennedy or not. I clearly recall that he was not universally adored until after he was dead, though.