Bush Dips Into The 20's in Polls NOW

The system of election and voting is all that I think is out of date. The core concept of this nation, based on what the Founders wanted, was that they wanted a nation where the people governed. They did the best they could at the time with what they had.

They instituted a system of representative government, one where the people elect officials to vote on behalf of them. They did it this way not because they necessarilly wanted it that way, but it was the only way that technology would allow the people to have at least some semblence of a say. They knew it would be corrupted over time, and made sure to have it written down that when that time should come, that action was needed. It's the hope of those in power that we the people don't see those statements, as they empower the people to a point of wanting to keep things the way they're supposed to be, in balance.

The system has become too much of an obstacle for this generation of people, and it's time that it changes. All I'm proposing is a simple amendment to the Constitution, abolishing the Electoral College, and allowing the people to have the opportunity to vote on all Congressional votes.

If you want a more in-depth description of why and how I came up with this proposal, search for my posts in the Political Section. You can't miss em. If after that, you still have any questions, lemme know. I'll answer.

TheBorg

Originally posted by TheBorg
They did the best they could at the time with what they had.

Well, why didn't they just do it as the popular vote then? That would have been a lot easier, I would think.

They knew it would be corrupted over time, and made sure to have it written down that when that time should come, that action was needed.

Again, if they knew it would be corrupted, then why wouldn't they just make it so that the general public elects by a popular vote? And how has it become corrupted, anyway?

Really, none of that makes any sense. You claim they foresaw this "corruption" coming, so why didn't they plan for it, like they did a lot of other things?

Anyway, to start getting this back on topic. Does anything think anything drastic is going to happen? I mean, Bush really doesn't seem to give a hoot about his ratings or the fact that his staff is slowly jumping ship. Maybe there's something coming he can't or doesn't want to stop? Another terrorist attack? Stock market crash? The apocolypse?

In the words of comedian Patton Oswalt, "I feel like George Bush can bring about the Biblical Apocolype. I don't mean the 'Road Warrior, there's no gas apocolype,' or the 'Jerry Bruckheimer, the weather's going crazy apocolypse.' I mean the 'Revelation of St. John, demons coming out of the ocean, seven headed beast, all that stuff, [apocolypse].' Because, here's the thing, I don't think Bush wants to be President. I think he wants to be The Last President!"

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid
Well, why didn't they just do it as the popular vote then? That would have been a lot easier, I would think.

The problem was that it would have taken forever for the thousands of people to cast individual votes on national business that needed to be done quickly, what with the whole Revolutionary War going on and all. We've come to the point technologically that we can now vote with the speed of light, allowing anyone and everyone to have a say in what they want. This is what I'm pushing for.

Again, if they knew it would be corrupted, then why wouldn't they just make it so that the general public elects by a popular vote? And how has it become corrupted, anyway?

Refer to my response to your last question above for the first question here.

As for how it became corrupted, that's a bit of a long story. Suffice it to say that the wealthy came in and started this thing called "lobbying" that allowed someone with money to "donate funds" to a particular candidate's campaign fund. This in and of itself probably wouldn't be a bad thing, if it weren't for the fact that the donators were not donating to them for the fun of it. They were donating to sway the respresentative's opinion on an upcoming vote. They knew that by donating to this particular person, that they would be more apt to vote in their favor, in fear that they'd lose that added bonus next time if they were to vote against them. Anyway, this caught on, and before anyone saw what was going on, those in power were being bought by the wealthy.

Really, none of that makes any sense. You claim they foresaw this "corruption" coming, so why didn't they plan for it, like they did a lot of other things?

They couldn't foresee what exactly was coming, but they knew that in time the newness of this government would wear off, and those that would be in power would learn how to corrupt it. And they did plan for it. They told the people to watch out. When the people saw that something wasn't right, they were told to get their guns and fix the problem. I don't believe that such an idea is necessary anymore, but it should be well remembered for in the event that it should have to be exercised.

Anyway, to start getting this back on topic. Does anything think anything drastic is going to happen? I mean, Bush really doesn't seem to give a hoot about his ratings or the fact that his staff is slowly jumping ship. Maybe there's something coming he can't or doesn't want to stop? Another terrorist attack? Stock market crash? The apocolypse?

In the words of comedian Patton Oswalt, "I feel like George Bush can bring about the Biblical Apocolype. I don't mean the 'Road Warrior, there's no gas apocolype,' or the 'Jerry Bruckheimer, the weather's going crazy apocolypse.' I mean the 'Revelation of St. John, demons coming out of the ocean, seven headed beast, all that stuff, [apocolypse].' Because, here's the thing, I don't think Bush wants to be President. I think he wants to be The Last President!"

Hehe. Now I don't know about all of that, but I do know that something is coming. I just hope it's not as bad as I'm thinking it's going to be. Oh, and thanks for listening to my ramblings.

TheBorg

THE LAST PRESIDENT


Isnt that the truth! I truly think he does want to be that.

He might very well be. That's his goal.

I doubt it. I think he's more interested in making sure that the next President elect doesn't have as much of a problem with the people. It all seems too orchestrated for my liking. It's almost like it's a well-planned out script. The timing of his approval ratings plummet is almost by itself enough to make a few eyebrows rise. If that weren't enough, he's now militarizing the southern borders, ensuring that no one enters or leaves without the government's knowledge.

I've got a bad feeling. I'm not sure what's going to happen, but it don't feel very good.

TheBorg

TheBorg,

You know i share in your bad feeling. We will soon find out. I almost wish i didnt live during these times- I dont know if i can handle all this.
Maybe this is the generation that will be hit with the serpents in Revelation.
Snakes, brings to mind the WH.
:shk:

This world is messed.

Ahh, no fear. You can't seriously not want to be here during these times. There's a lot of good to be done. Wouldn't you want to be forever remembered as being one of the ones that helped in that plan to make things better?

I like change, and look foward to it. It's something that makes me feel good about myself, knowing that there will come a day when I will not have to worry about what I think or feel for fear that some opressive group will come to put me in jail for my radical thinking. I think outside the box, and encourage everyone else to do the same.

TheBorg

Originally posted by TheBorg
If that weren't enough, he's now militarizing the southern borders, ensuring that no one enters or leaves without the government's knowledge.

I think I wouldn't really worry until the border Canada was militarized. It's even longer and even more unprotected. Way more unprotected. For example, people boating across the Great Lakes don't actually have to check into Customs when coming across from Canada. Sure, they might if they go to a major port, but if they just decide to go to some smaller one at some coastal town they most they would need to do is the optional check in with the harbor master!

I remember reading that they are going to begin arming the Great Lakes Coast Guard ships, putting a large caliber machine gun below deck and brought up when absolutely needed. Still, though, that doesn't do much for the thousands of miles of Canada that are not part of the Great Lakes border. Even still, the USCG wouldn't have enough time or resources to check every boat.

EDIT: Most just submitted itself while I was typing... That was... Odd...

[edit on 5/16/2006 by cmdrkeenkid]

Well he did mention that he's bolstering both borders, not just the Southern one. So I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing more of a military contingent up here in the Northern states as well.

TheBorg

Originally posted by dgtempe
Let us not forget the infamous "Diabold" Without them, there
would more than likely be no "Bush"

Gotta disagree with ya dg. The voting machines were very
well looked after. When there were voting machine problems
then they were locked down and taken away. In Philly we had
machines that the poll workers found to have thousands of
KERRY votes pre-registered on them. Those machines were
obviously tampered with and taken away.

Poll workers from the republican and democrat camps
both checked machines.

Anyways .. so Bush's numbers are horrid. Are ya' going to have a
party to celebrate dg? Memorial Day weekend? You can celebrate
a new baby in the family, the fact that the comet missed, and
that G.W. has failing numbers. You should have a real blowout!

Originally posted by dgtempe
THE LAST PRESIDENT

He might very well be. That's his goal.

I don't think so. He couldn't last past this term. Heck,
he never really got to be president to begin with. Cheney
has always been the real president.

Besides, you don't have to worry about G.W. being president
for life. Hillary is coming. She won't let him ... because
SHE wants to be pres. for life!

I dont know about the stolen elections. :shk: Party? heck yes! When will the coast be free of the asteroid? the 26th of May? I'll have mine the 27th
I only wish you could come!
We'd have girl talk (most likely about Bush) Shhh..., Paella and some fun!!
By the time you left my good company, you'd be seeing things my way.

Originally posted by dgtempe
We'd have girl talk

THAT would be dangerous!!

The comet is supposed to be past and we can breath
on May 26. Supposedly the big splash is for May 25.
Party at dgs digs at Cape Code on May 26th!!!
(I'd bring some Guiliani 2008 bumper stickers)

Actually, we will be in Gettysburg that weekend.
We go every Memorial Day weekend. It's great
fun. We watch the parade. My parents meet us
there. They watch my daughter at the hotel while
my husband and I do some goooooood ghosthunting!!

Don't worry, Dgtempe, Karl Rove, noting the president's high personal approval ratings from a poll, said that most Americans still like George Bush. I can't tell you my sources, but here's the list of GOP candidates for 2008, based on likeability,

1. Forrest Gump
2. Santa Claus
3. Jesus Christ

dg if those are really your eyes I want in on that partay!

But Locutus is on the right track regarding the electoral college. It blows. But so does the two party system. The best and quickest way to improve things would be to eliminate the electoral college and open the voting up with what we call IRV - Instant Run-off Voting. Take a minute to check it out here.

n IRV, voters mark their preferences on the ballot by putting a 1 next to their first choice, a 2 next to their second choice, and so on. A candidate who receives over 50% of the first preference votes is declared the winner. Otherwise, the weakest candidate is eliminated and his or her votes are reallocated to the voters’ second choices. This reallocation process continues until one candidate receives a majority of the votes.


This voting system has a number of obvious advantages over plurality voting. First, IRV ensures that the winning candidate receives the support of the majority of voters. That is not always the case in plurality voting. Assume for instance that there are three candidates vying for office and the Republican receives 43% of the vote, the Democrat receives 40% and the Green candidate 17%. Under plurality rules, the Republican wins – even though the majority of voters opposed that candidate and actually voted for candidates on the left. This example also illustrates another problem of plurality voting: the spoiler. A spoiler is a minor party candidate that takes away enough votes from one major party candidates to ensure the election of the other major party candidate, who would not have won otherwise. In the case above, those who voted for the Green candidate inadvertently helped the Republican candidate win.

Instant runoff voting eliminates both minority winners and spoilers. In the above example, since neither major party candidate received over 50% of the vote, the weakest candidate – the Green – would be eliminated and his or her votes transferred to their second choices. Assuming 11% of the Green vote goes to the Democrat, that candidate would win with 51% of the vote. In this way, IRV ensures a winner supported by the majority of voters, and also that votes for minor party candidates do not inadvertently aid in the election of a candidates those voters want the least.

www.mtholyoke.edu...

IMO this is the only answer. It would effectively eliminate the Hobson's choice of tweedle dumb and tweedle dumber. More importantly, it would take out the power brokers who run the two dominant parties. The corp's couldn't possibly canvass all the candidates with cash. Especially guys like Dennis Kucinich who refuses to accept ANY corporate money.

It's necessary and some jurisdictions have adopted it or are considering it at a local level or on a state by state basis. Spread the word. It could save us or our kids from slavery.

I hear you dgtemp...I loathe Shrub & Coward also.

Unfortunately, polls such as the one you make reference to dont mean an awful lot come voting day. They indicate fluctuations in popularity, thats about it. I remember seeing footage of Shrub just after he won the second election, he looked totally surprised.

By the time of the next election, no doubt conflict between Israel-the Coalition and Iran will be to the forefront and the civies will vote for the shmucks who are knee deep in it. Yanno, better the devil ya know..unfortunately.

In AU, Coward won at the end of the day because people were frightened of a rise in interest rates. And thats about how shallow and pathetic it gets.