[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Call for a re-vote.


     The electoral college could be adjusted without
changing the constitution.  I think that two states do
not have the winner take all policy.  All of the states
could distribute their electoral votes roughly according
to their popular vote.

     Overall the damage could be limited by limiting the
size of the federal government.  State governments are
closer to the people.  The United States is getting too
homogenized by having one answer for every region.

     The electoral college gives less populous rural
areas a chance to be heard.  I think that cities are too
quick to believe that they know what is right for rural
areas.  Cities are too easily influenced by advertising.
The large metropolatan areas could be convinced by
candidates using advertising dollars efficiently and by
getting the corporations that control the news media to
promote their party.  It is not healthy to only have two
parties.

     I hope that this years election will cause every
state to build in more safeguards to avoid the problems
of mistaken votes, such as voting machines that let you
change your mind until you hit the submit button so that
you can review your votes just to be sure you did not make a mistake.

     They probably should have a separate ballot for each
race such as president,senator, congressman, dog-catcher
and coroner.  That would make it easier to recount one
set of ballots, or to set aside questionable ballots to
decide later how they should be counted.

     The computer cards have too many problems for an
accurate count.  You should be able to have a recount
with the same numbers each time.  I do not like the idea
that a chad could hang loose from the computer card and
block the hole during one count and not block the hole
on the next count.  You cannot easily look at a computer
card and decide if you voted correctly or if the card
was in the voting machine correctly so that you did not
accidentally punch the wrong hole.  I worry that computer
cards are too easy for an elections official to make
votes that did not exist before.  If someone did not
vote for president an election official could poke out the
hole of one of the presidents.

     Overall the election process should be gradually
improved upon each year for an accurate count.  Just as
poll workers often are watched by party officials of both
parties the entire process of registration and publicizing
voting locations should be watched at every election.
Police roadblocks and other police intimidations should
be reported and stopped as soon as it happens.  This
could be done by using cell phones to report each incident
and having many people ready and able to investigate
immediately.  There should never be a case of not enough
ballots or telling people that they are not allowed to
wait in line to vote.

--Rick C


Cygnet <sswans83 at calvin_edu> wrote:
>Sort of.  In actuallity the votes of say Montana are weighted so that they
>get a little more say per vote.  Montana has 3 electorial votes for a
>little over 1 million people compared to Florida which has 25 votes for
>more than 18 million or something like that.  Needless to say there are
>many more people per vote in the big vote states than there are in the big
>population states.  This, at least in theory, forces the candidate to take
>some consideration of the people in these states.  Otherwise why couldn't
>Gore or Bush completely ignore the people of Montana.  After all they have
>only 1/3 of a percent of the election.  Whereas now the people of Montana
>represent 3/5 of a percent of the election.  Still a very small fragment,
>but not quite as inconsequential.
>
>Steve
>

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.

---------------
Unsubscribe by going to http://www.actwin.com/MediaNation/OtR/