A difference that makes no difference, is no difference. If they're ignored with the electoral system already, at the very least it isn't worse if they're still ignored with the popular vote. At least the majority vote is heard. Have you heard of a better approach being presented?

I think it has been proven time and time again that "majority rule" is not all it is cracked up to be.

Fascinating, would you opt for something else like a meritocracy or a technocracy or something like that?

Far better option especially in cases where the majority are illiterate and fucking ignorant too boot. :2 cents:

You democrats are in denial about whats going on out there. :1orglaugh

The debates clearly influenced polling and candidate momentum. Obama set himself up poorly with his Libya dodge and he is going to have some explaining to do.

The other interesting spin I see everywhere is that my state is a swing state. We elected a republican US Senator, and a republican governor who just soundly beat back the democrats in his recall election.

Romney is leading in the polls discussing solutions for jobs, debt and the economy while Obama is talking about binders, Big Bird and playing word games because his record is a failure.

Do you agree that majority rule is not always the best option?

Depends on the poll you look at

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

If that continues to follow through, will the Democrats kick and cry because the electoral vote is not right and popular vote should win? Dammit, nevermind, we aren't talking about Gore.

NWA bitches

http://www.oddschecker.com/specials/...lection/winner

The general consensus with the bookies is that Obama has a 65% chance of taking this thing.

Put your money where your mouth is.

Move to Somalia. :2 cents:

Exactly

And if we did that Ron Paul, Roseanne Barr, Gary Johnson and the like will still not be contenders by the time we get to round two.

Not true.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ycategory2.png

21.05% spent on the war on terror + 16.85% on Department of Defence.

Only 11% is spent on Unemployment / Welfare.

It matters. While they may look the same from far enough away, a little digging will reveal plenty of differences. Women's health and abortion, equal pay for women etc, are both areas that they differ greatly on.

the 21.05% is social security.

I take it you have never had a real job.

http://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/ga...ng_is_fine.jpg

heh-heh...couldn't resist :1orglaugh

I'm not sure. Majority rule is probably the most fair, but not always the best. Otherwise, I guess you'd have to decide to be less fair to the masses and start making some decisions for them, in their best interests. With that sometimes evil statement, "for the greater good."

The United States is not a "democracy," it's a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC.

"I pledge Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands...."

I think most people get that, you don't have to always play word nazi whenever someone talks about a majority rule. Just like you had to assume we were talking about the United States when we're discussing different systems, you could just assume we're talking about a democracy or even a republic if it makes you feel better.

Yeah...that makes total sense. NOT.

Social Security is supposed to be the govt. holding on to YOUR money and giving it back to YOU when you reach a certain age.

It's not meant to be a new tax on everybody that pays for other people. (even though that's the way it's becoming...and people are starting to think like that as you just showed with that stupid cartoon)

Who says my comments were even directed at you? It's not like I quoted you.

And I would have to disagree with "most people get that," because they don't. The average American will tell you this is a democracy, and even worse they think that's what our military is doing all around the world: "spreading it." lol

That's what people who don't really want to get involved say. it's easy to say "They're all the same" and go beat off. :jerkoff

They are NOT the same. Their policies differ dramatically (actually, I challenge anyone to say what the fuck Romney's policies really ARE). That bitch has repackaged himself so many times nobody knows who he is.

People lead. Leaders follow. The important stuff is what we do BETWEEN elections. You can't just vote, and leave the country on auto-pilot, and bitch in 4 years that everything sucks. Well, you CAN, but it's stupid.

This country has gone through so many dramatic changes - POSITIVE changes. Because people didn't just complain then go beat off. :jerkoff

Obama 2012.

http://p.twimg.com/A23e_tYCMAAQPVf.jpg

I have my feet dangling in my pool. Really, my life is just fine (health issues aside).

In context of what we were discussing, ie. the popular vote vs electoral college, the popular vote would be a democracy vs the electoral college being a republic. Since we were discussing it in this context, they're mostly the same. Very rarely does the electoral vote not represent the popular vote.

I'm always interested in philosophizing about a better form or a better approach. Not that we'd ever implement or change, but it's still interesting to discuss.

They are exactly the same on the bigger picture things that actually matter, because they are both puppets of the same interests.

Sure they differ on things that seem petty in comparison like tax rates and abortion, etc.

http://www.ccun.org/images/2008/July...a%2023jul8.jpg

You can't be pres unless you're a shill for them...

Sure, but...

http://www.policymic.com/articles/11...e-bush-neocons

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debat...against-obama/

Can we talk about how Romney left his state in such disarray that it has the highest tax burden per resident of any state in this fine nation?

Obama may have a spending problem but Romney isn't the solution ... so now all he has to ride on is his character and social stances and he gets a big F in both areas.

I wonder how civil rights activists feel about it.

Already used to be trampled over and ignored or they wouldn't have to be activists in the first place.

By that response, I am not sure that you picked up on the original question.

Ever since I was a kid in the 1960's I heard people call it "Tax-a-chusetts"

For as long as I can remember it's always been very liberal and of course with liberalism comes high taxes. :)

Sorry, I meant debt. So he just gets a free pass?

Nope. Just read what you quoted.

Obama is a joke, and Romney is an idiot....What do we have left?

http://garyjohnson2012.com

And I'm voting Libertarian for local and state offices too.

Your idiocy is only surpassed by JohnnyClips. :2 cents:
Nothing I can do about that

State and local is where you need to start before throwing away your vote on the Federal level.

Me neither. I still haven't been bothered enough to seek context. ;)