I'm tired of IRS paperwork every year -- We Need a Change Now!

MGB · Feb 6, 2008

Incorrect.

These ultimately resulted in a December 12 7-2 United States Supreme Court decision that the Florida Supreme Court's scheme for recounting ballots was unconstitutional, as well as a 5-4 United States Supreme Court decision that ended the Florida recounts and allowed Florida to certify its vote.

Wow, my source of information sucks :-)

Thanks for the correction.

MGB · Feb 6, 2008

Any system were someone gets 2,000,000 votes more than the other guy and still loses the election is not OK.

It's only happened 4 times in history. It's a minor side effect of having a electoral college system.

The whole "electoral vote" system is a scheme to assure that only politicians get to choose the president and vice president. Making it nearly impossible for a third party to emerge.

"only politicians" get to choose? I partly agree with respect to the democratic party. The democratic party has 842 unpledged âsuper-delegatesâ who comprise nearly 40 percent of the number of delegates needed to clinch the Democratic nomination.

The "super-delegates" can vote any way they want. Yes, 40% of the delegates that are not voted by the people. Because of these rules, the democratic party is undemocratic, in my opinion.

Who are the "super-delegates"? This includes Democratic governors and members of Congress, former presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, former vice president Al Gore, retired congressional leaders such as Dick Gephardt, and all Democratic National Committee members, some of whom are appointed by party chairman Howard Dean.

So yes, I would agree that democratic party's "politicians" are choosing the next President since they control 40% of the overall delegates.

The republican party, however, does not have a "super-delegate" system. Their approach is more pure and more democratic.

sprstpd · Feb 6, 2008

Quote from MGB:

Wow, my source of information sucks

Thanks for the correction.

The only reason I remembered the Supreme Court vote was that they all voted along party lines on that 5-4 vote and it pissed me off to no end. I mean, why even bother to hear the case if that is what is going to happen? Annoying as hell.

eusdaiki · Feb 6, 2008

Quote from MGB:

It's only happened 4 times in history. It's a minor side effect of having a electoral college system.

"only politicians" get to choose? I partly agree with respect to the democratic party. The democratic party has 842 unpledged âsuper-delegatesâ who comprise nearly 40 percent of the number of delegates needed to clinch the Democratic nomination.

The "super-delegates" can vote any way they want. Yes, 40% of the delegates that are not voted by the people. Because of these rules, the democratic party is undemocratic, in my opinion.

Who are the "super-delegates"? This includes Democratic governors and members of Congress, former presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, former vice president Al Gore, retired congressional leaders such as Dick Gephardt, and all Democratic National Committee members, some of whom are appointed by party chairman Howard Dean.

So yes, I would agree that democratic party's "politicians" are choosing the next President since they control 40% of the overall delegates.

The republican party, however, does not have a "super-delegate" system. Their approach is more pure and more democratic.

I think the whole electoral college system is obsolete and unnecessary, given today's technology. You don't need to send guys to Washington representing each state to choose the president, you can have the results faxed or emailed.

With this system a vote from a person in one state is worth more than a vote from a person in another state... I prefer the idea of each person having 1 vote regardless of which state they come from.

But, I don't think that's going to change there are too many people who have gotten too powerful within this system and they'll never allow change.

[btw... down here in Costa Rica, the entire electorate is a bit more than 2 million people... perhaps that's why 2 million seems like a big number to me]

TopTrader8 · Feb 10, 2008

Quote from MGB:

The republican party, however, does not have a "super-delegate" system. Their approach is more pure and more democratic.

If the republican party does not have a superdelegate system then how will the winner be determined if neither candidate get the required 1121 delegates to secure the nomination (which is still a theoretical possibility) ?

agmccall · Feb 10, 2008

Quote from TopTrader8:

If the republican party does not have a superdelegate system then how will the winner be determined if neither candidate get the required 1121 delegates to secure the nomination (which is still a theoretical possibility) ?

With what we have to choose from.....Who Cares

gnome · Feb 10, 2008

Quote from agmccall:

With what we have to choose from.....Who Cares

We've got 9 months for everybody in America to get that message.

If that happens, almost nobody will bother to vote. Then the politicians just might ask, "what's the matter"?

bellman · Feb 10, 2008

+1

Quote from bigarrow:

What is wrong with raising taxes to match spending? Isn't that the conservative way? Either cut spending to match income or raise income to match spending or a combination of both. That is conservative, that is how we manage our personal financial lives if we're smart. And the deal with the tax cuts, it is not a tax cut when the government spends more than it receives that year. It is a tax increase on the future, the only way a deficit can be repaid is with future taxes. I don't know how so many people get so excited about tax cuts that aren't matched with spending cuts. It's all smoke and mirrors and everyones falling for it.

TopTrader8 · Feb 10, 2008

Quote from agmccall:

With what we have to choose from.....Who Cares

If radically changing the way taxes are collected in this country is not a priority for you then what is it that you would like to see in a Presidential Candidate?

TopTrader8 · Feb 10, 2008

Quote from MGB:

The republican party, however, does not have a "super-delegate" system. Their approach is more pure and more democratic.

Again, I'm hoping MGB or someone can answer this question for me:

If the republican party does not have a superdelegate system then how will the winner be determined if neither candidate get the required 1121 delegates to secure the nomination (which is still a theoretical possibility) ?