Chances of the 2004 Election being decided in the courts: High

Discussion in 'Audio Emcee Hook Ups' started by Rakuseki, Oct 19, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rakuseki

    Rakuseki The Disgruntled Negro

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    2,382
    Peep this article I found on the net by George Will.

    test
  2. David Cadence

    David Cadence wake me up be4 you go go!

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    897
    lol. I would literally lmao if we had an interim president for like 5 months.
    test
  3. Rakuseki

    Rakuseki The Disgruntled Negro

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    2,382
    It'd probably be Dennis Hasert, the Speaker of the House.
    test
  4. David Cadence

    David Cadence wake me up be4 you go go!

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    897
    umm...wouldn't it be whomever is speaker of the house at the time of inauguration?


    so i think they'd be re-inaugurated as a Rep, then they'd be inaugurated as President.
    test
  5. Phantom

    Phantom T'is I, Ray Ocean

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    13,677
    the only way to nullify that bullshit is to do away with the outdated electoral college...

    the popular vote is the ONLY thing that matters....

    every other office is decided by whoever has the most votes...and thats how it should be.
    test
  6. Rakuseki

    Rakuseki The Disgruntled Negro

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    2,382
    Why is the electoral college outdated again? The United States is a federal republic -- it only makes sense that each state holds its own election to decide how that state will vote for the presidency -- just like each state holds its own elections to decide who its senators and representatives will be.

    We aren't a democracy, so the popular vote obviously isn't the only thing that matters.
    test
  7. Phantom

    Phantom T'is I, Ray Ocean

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    13,677
    i already said before we arent a democracy, and i understand states being afforded the right to vote for the presidency but what makes that for lack of a better word, retarded, is that we are voting as a country who is going to lead our country, not our state. therefore, it should be popular vote based. assigned votes based on population is stupid because its been proven that if a candidate could win states like california, texas,new york, and florida , they would already be more than half way there....and then 46 other states are just fodder.

    its outdated and the election in 2000 proved it.

    the same thing is about to happen again.
    test
  8. Rakuseki

    Rakuseki The Disgruntled Negro

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    2,382
    Of course, you neglect the fact that 51 percent majorities in each of these states almost wins you the entire popular vote as well -- winning simple majorities in each of those four states gets you around 40-45 million votes. When there are 80 million registered voters in America, that speaks volumes.

    So by your own estimation, it seems that the electoral college system is even more fair than your popular election system because one only needs votes from four states to win it all.
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)