This quote popped into my mind as I watched the dust settle on this election: “I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President.” That was Walden O’Dell, CEO of Diebold, makers of easily hackable voting machines.
Not that I think Ohio’s votes were anything but honest, because I believe that they really were honest. I just think its spooky that he’d say that before Ohio goes and takes the title of Election Battleground away from Florida.
Truth be told, I think the whole electoral college voting is as rigged as a Midway carny game. “Close, but no cigar, kid! Try again, yuk yuk yuk.” I’d like to see direct elections in this country.
That quote is pulled out of context. Surely you read the whole slashdot article, not just the first 10 comments!
We could make the electoral college more interesting by allowing states to split their votes. So North Carolina could split its 15 votes to, 9 for Bush and 6 for Kerry (just an example, don’t get all worked up on the numbers). That would better represent the diversity of each state.
And it would blow Tim Russert’s mind.
Oh, I thought you were joking about the Slashdot comment. I haven’t read Slashdot months.
I like the idea of splitting electoral votes. I think it makes candidates focus too much on the big states: California, Texas, Florida, New York. All other states are second-class.
Colorado may actually have enacted that with a ballot initiave this election.
And the quote is accurate. I’m not saying that’s what he meant when he said it, but an evil imagination could conjure up a link. 🙂
actually, the electoral college prevents too much emphasis on the big states. Yes, they still matter but if it wasn’t for the electoral college basically 10 counties in the country would determine the president. As Jeff pointed out the other night, look at Wyoming, they have less population but still have a minimum of three electoral votes. Their people to electoral vote is probably the highest in the land. It keeps places like Wyoming “in play” and not get ignored.
The electoral college is fine. Sure, it’s quirky but it mostly gets the job done.
No, the electoral college forces candidates to emphasize the big states. Given a choice between California’s 50+ electoral votes and Wyoming’s three, guess which state gets shafted?
Politicians don’t chase states with puny electoral votes. So exactly how are those states helped?
The electoral college gives small states more power. Republicans don’t “chase” the small states, but each person in a small state should know that their say means more. That is unfair- one vote should be one vote, period.
For example, in 2000, Montana had a population of 902,195 and had 3 electoral votes. California had 33,871,648 people and 54 electoral votes at the time. Therefore, while California has many more electoral votes to cast, people in Montana individually have a greater influence on their state’s electoral votes. California has 627,252 people per electoral vote while Montana has 300,731 people per electoral vote.
Not to mention that the electoral college is just ridiculous in that we should be able to go out and vote for president- not vote on which party’s electors will vote for president for us. Democracy, my ass.
My journal looks goth from all the black. I just have to mourn for our country for awhile. Anyway, I realized I don’t think I’d ever given you the link to it. It’s not fancy like yours!
http://www.livejournal.com/users/cry884/
At any rate, I think it’s a damn shame this country couldn’t give Travis the best birthday present ever- a president who would actually do some good for the average person.