It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Teikiatsu
a reply to: Gryphon66
You can't even use the term disenfranchise correctly, and you think you have presented evidence and reasons?
...
Good night, gryph.
disenfranchise
verb
dis·en·fran·chise | ˌdis-in-ˈfran-ˌchīz disenfranchised; disenfranchising; disenfranchises
transitive verb : to deprive of a franchise, of a legal right, or of some privilege or immunity especially : to deprive of the right to vote
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Gryphon66
Not really.
It'd dimply losing an election. Just because the outcome of that loss kicks into another system than direct doesn't matter. The end result is the same. You are voting on what the electors are pledged to do. You win; they vote one way. You lose; they don't. Still simple cause/effect.
Why do you think there was such an uproar over the idea of an elector revolt? That would be disenfrachisement or the negation of people's votes.
I'm emotionally involved?
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: shooterbrody
We cant win
Lets change the rules
Perhaps simply change your platforms that people dislike?
I’m not a Democrat.
Also, the rules that I am suggesting we change would benefit Republicans and Democrats AND minority party candidates and voters. The current system cheats the minority parties; I am recommending a equitable solution.