07-05-2008, 10:43 PM | #1 |
Formerly Mastershake
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 707
|
Utah has the lowest voter turnout
http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700240767,00.html
I'm shocked. I would have guessed it would have been on the higher side. I'm guessing not having a viable second party has hurt turnout
__________________
And maybe if we tell the truth about the past, maybe we tell the truth about the present -- Ken Loach |
07-05-2008, 11:08 PM | #2 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,589
|
Quote:
|
|
07-06-2008, 01:45 AM | #3 |
Formerly Mastershake
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 707
|
It sure does. If McCain spends time here it isn't to court voters it's just to raise cash.
__________________
And maybe if we tell the truth about the past, maybe we tell the truth about the present -- Ken Loach |
07-06-2008, 02:15 AM | #4 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Oak Ridge, TN
Posts: 1,308
|
Quote:
The EC isn't perfect, but I prefer it to the alternative.
__________________
e^(i * pi) + 1 = 0 5 great numbers in one little equation. |
|
07-06-2008, 03:51 AM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Bluth Home
Posts: 3,877
|
Agree. No one would bother at all with Utah for example. Just win California, Florida and New York and you're pretty much there. You can ignore the rest of the country.
__________________
The Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go. -Galileo |
07-06-2008, 02:51 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,368
|
they don't bother with Utah now. The 5 electoral votes are a done deal in the R column as it is. There may be valid arguments for keeping it the way it is, but this is not one of them, IMO. As it is now, all they do is figure out which states will be close and only campaign there. I understand why they set up the electoral college in the first place, but at the same time, it's somewhat annoying to me that my vote really doesn't count because I live in a state where there is never a question where those electoral votes will go. Don't forget, the writers of the Constitution did not have political parties in mind, so I doubt they envisioned it working like this either.
|
07-06-2008, 03:18 PM | #7 | |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,365
|
Quote:
I see what, hundreds of Obama yard-signs. I havent' seen a single McCain sign. At this point, I would definitely predict Obama to win my neighborhood, and it wouldn't surprise me if Texas were in play. |
|
07-06-2008, 03:53 PM | #8 | |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 471
|
Quote:
End women's suffrage!!!!! |
|
07-06-2008, 03:53 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,589
|
If someone wins CA, FL, and NY, they're winning in a landslide in the EC. They could win all three of those (by small margins) and still lose with the popular vote.
|
07-06-2008, 03:58 PM | #10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,589
|
Quote:
Similarly, the platform is currently targeted towards special interests in battleground states. Consistently Republican or Democratic states are essentially ignored. The biggest argument for the popular system is exactly what started this thread--voter turnout. I'm going to the polls only out of obligation. My vote will not count, and to tell you the truth, if I have any sort of conflict, I probably won't vote. If I knew my vote were counting, the impetus to vote would be stronger. |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|