Someone posted in here earlier that the Electoral College should be abolished.

Here's why this is not a good idea: if the Electoral College is abolished, and, the new system is to go by the popular vote only, then only the voters in New York, California, Florida, Pennsylvania, and Texas will ever see a presidential candidate in person again. The candidates will go where the votes are...big population centers. So, for the rest of us in BFE...aka Dakotas, Nebraska, Colorado (the small states)...we will largely be ignored.

I would like to see the Electoral College system changed...give every state an equal amount of Electoral Votes, and the Electors have to abide by the state results. This way, South Dakota becomes just as important as California...

OK, I know I'm living in a dream world, and likely, abolishing or changing the EC will not happen. Democracy is an imperfect thing.

I would like to add one final comment, quoting the man I really wanted to be President, Sen. John McCain of Arizona. At the GOP Convention, these were a small part of his remarks. Very ironic foreshadowing of the current crisis we find ourselve in today. I think both Bush and Gore need to take these words to heart, as should all Americans...

"To achieve the necessary changes to the practices and institutions of our democracy we need to be a little less content. We need to get riled up a bit, and stand up for the values that made America great. Rally to this new patriotic challenge or lose forever America's extraordinary ability to see around the corner of history. Americans, enter the public life of your country determined to tell the truth; to put problem solving ahead of partisanship; to defend the national interest against the forces that would divide us. Keep your promise to America, as she has kept her promise to you, and you will know a happiness far more sublime than pleasure.

It is easy to forget in politics where principle ends and selfishness begins. It takes leaders of courage and character to remember the difference. "

Sorry the post is so long, but I thought it important.

While predicting voting trends isn't an exact art, there might be some truth to what mgd says' however not in the way she thinks.

The policy wonk had to jump in here. 4 years of people telling me my polsci degree was worthless, which it still is, but now I am so the expert on everything. Anyway, unfortunately, the current two party system is destined to remain in place because of the US' "winner take all" election system. If we had proportionasl representation like in europe, Nader (had he gotten 5% of the poular vote, 5% of the us house would be Green party members, or approx, 21 members). Until then, it is virtually impossible to have a Major 3rd party presence in this country. The states are responsible for their election laws, so all 50 (or at least a majority) would have to change the way we elect candidates.

What is more likely to occur is a major party reallignment. A large group of people get so fed up with the current system, they abandon the controlling party. In 1865 at the conclusion of the civil war, blacks who had been educated to be Democrats left the party and flocked to the party of Lincoln, where they remained until the turn of the century. It also happened in 1932, with the election of FDR. Many lifelong Republicans left the party, due to the economic conditions of the time and stayed loyal Democrats until their deaths.

Additionally, but far less drastic changes in party ideology could occur, i.e., the democrats will swing back to the left, away from the center.

While these scenarios do not occur with great frequency, they do happen. Usually due to some great social movement or economic condition.

Did I just re-write my final from Political Parties and Interest Groups-3013? I think so.


I just like all this 'cause when else would I have an opportunity to validate myself ands my degree like that on greekchat.com http://www.greekchat.com/forums/ubb/biggrin.gif

Well put lifesaver,

My grandfather fits this scenario well...he was brought up Republican, but all that changed in the depression...he's been a FDR democrat ever since. In fact, he did consider voting for Nader, but, he did his homework first, and stuck with Gore (I tried and tried to get him to go for Bush, but he's still mad over the depression. 60 year old memories die hard).

Why not Nader? It wasn't the person...it was the party platform that scared him. He said that the Green Party's platform actually called for the total disarmament of the military - that is truly a scary direction to go in. With the current global situation, we need a strong, ready military. I feel Nader could have had a stronger showing had he addressed some of the truly radical platform ideas. Buchanan? He dug his own grave at the Reform party convention...with his poor showing, I think he ran that party out of existence. Too bad, I liked Perot's tact.

You're right...we might possibly see a major political shift away from one if not both parties. If the FL vote ends up Bush, and Gore keeps on with the lawsuits, it'll derail the democratic party's credibility for future leadership. However, should the vote turn Gore's way, and if the Bush campaign goes to the courts, the same thing could happen with the republicans. I think the democrats are at greater risk...Bush would concede and get it over with if the vote turns. Gore won't. He's even quoted as saying such in the current issue of Newsweek. In his own words (and I might be paraphrasing this just a bit, I left the magazine at work) "If Bush loses, life will go on for him. Me, I'll do anything to win." He said "we ain't seen nothing yet" and I truly believe it, though it's not in the context I wish it were.

Either way, just like I posted back somewhere on the first page of this string, it has been an exciting part of history to live through, and to explain to my two sons how the whole system works. My oldest son, after I explained the EC, popular vote, and the current FL situation (this was just after the FIRST recount, with Bush still ahead), he asked "If he (Gore) lost, why doesn't he quit? It's stupid." Gee, if only I had Gore's home number for my son to call...the innocence of youth!

Lifesaver- I feel ya on the uselessness of a history/poly sci degrees - I'm discovering this now as I'm looking for a job post-graduation. However, I'm a popular person around campus right now...everybody I know is coming up to me and saying "So what's going on here....?"

LXA, I have to say, that mostly I agree. But the way I look at it, a total disarment of our military will never happen, not in my lifetime, not in my children's lifetime, maybe not even in my grandchildren's lifetime. It just won't happen. The rest of washington wouldn't let a president do that. They also wouldn't let a president make abortion illegal, they also wouldn't let a president take away civilian right to bear arms. It will just NEVER happen. So, when we talk about the Green Parties stand on disarming the military, it's only what they WISH could happen, just like Bush can only WISH abortion didn't exixt, just like Gore WISHES he could get rid of all our guns. So we have to look at the realistic things candidates want to do.

I like what Jon Stewart said on the Daily Show last night, something along the lines of, Both candidates would roast their grandmother over Kennedy's eternal flame and feed the meat to Jesus to get elected. Although rather crude, I couldn't stop laughing!

Also, you poli-sci majors will be able to correct me on this probably, but haven't we had one 3rd party president, Teddy Roosevelt? Also, of course, Washington didn't have a party affiliation, I don't think.

------------------
Steve Corbin
Lambda Chi Alpha
Theta Kappa Chapter
Rose-Hulman Inst. of Tech.

Corbin,

John Daily is probably right!

Yes, I can't remember what president changed the election process. It used to be there were no parties. . . who was it that formed a party? Goodness, I can't remember, but I do know that the president it began with didn't really want to start a party, it was his supporters that did.

Somewhat correct. Teddy Roosevelt was a Republican when he assumed the presidency upon the death of president McKinley. He made a public statement that he would only seek two terms in office. he later regretted this statement. he was a Republican president both terms, but after he left office, decided to run in 1912 on the Republican ticket. the nomination went to someone else, so he formed his own party, the Bull-Moose Party (a progressive/grange type party; populist-based) and effectively split the republican vote and getting Woodrow Wilson elected as the Democrat.

Washington was not affilliated with a party, however there were factions at the time, to which the other founding fathers belonged to, namely the federalists, and those opposed to the federalists (states rights), which then became the Whigs and Democrat-Republicans (one party), the Democrats emerged, and the republicans emerged onto the national scene about 1856 or so.

I tried to be brief. It's not exact, but close. Feel free to correct me if I am in error on dates or anything.

Mikki,
Dead on...a two-party system keeps the "extreme" stances of either party in check...hence the moderate presidents that we have had since Reagan.

My view on the military (being slightly biased as I am a veteran myself):

If you want peace, prepare for war. That's the only way to keep the foreign "despots" (Saddam/Khadafi/binLaden) from taking more extreme actions against the United States.

My other favorite military quote: Peace through firepower.

Well, I looked it up last nigth. It was Hamilton and Jefferson. With that election came the begining of the party system. Federalists and Republican. Before them (only 2 presidents) there was no party system.

If Bush doesnt win its only because the Demos steal it from him with the Courts permission. All the fuss by Gore is just more whiney-baby demo stuff. The liberals talk about fairness, but they dont know how to live it when its not in their favor.

Exactly, how many recounts will it take to get the result they want. They are just being poor losers and should have stuck with the first count. How can they possibly have an accurate count now, or how can you validate the truthfulness of the florida votes in question. I think its a conspiracy. They have definitely learned from slick willy.

I wanted to stay out of this but...
My opinion is this. What Republicans have shown me as an African American, Woman, taxpayer, student, is that they DON't care.
About:
Affirmitave Action
Children
Homelessness
Health care
senior citizens
Public Schools
Race relations
Gun control
freedom of choice re:reproductive rights,
the condition of the earth,
people who are not of European heritage,
do I need to go on?
I live in California. Pete Wilson(past governor) put more money into jails than schools. What kind of sense does that make? Educate all of our children so they can make wise decesions and not end up in the penal system! Our public schools are falling apart, literally. Old books, depleting buildings, not enough qualified teachers,low pay for teachers, overcrowded classrooms, lead poisoning in plumbing fixtures, low test scores..the list goes on.

Remember when Ronald Regan closed those state and federal funded mental care hospitals? Put a lot of people on the street and in some cases, stopped or limited treatment and/or medication? My family has to constantly fight to get the state to give my brother the basic medical treatment he needs. He is mentally disabled and a parinoid schizophrenia.
Am I angry? Damn right I am.

And as far as reproductive rights are concerned, that is a DECISION that is left up to that INDIVIDUAL. Years ago, I was raped.I became pregnant. Where was the government (Bush) when I was going through all the anguish and dispair and roller coaster of emotions? It was a decision I and I alone had to make. Yes, I had an abortion. All by myself. It was the BEST decision and CHOICE for ME. I don't make choices for other women, only myself. All I'm saying is have all safe options avalible.

I'm not even going to get into Bush Sr. or Nixon.

So, if it takes recounting ballots, then fine, do it. If that makes me a "poor loser" then call me that but I think I have good reasons. It's too personal for me.

There, I'm done. I'll get off my box.

ps.
I'm not apologizing for any of my views nor do I expect anyone else to.


X marks the spot

X girl

[This message has been edited by theXgirl (edited November 18, 2000).]

now there's a strong, opinionated woman for you... way to go X girl

in 1828, is the elction you are looking for, wher the "era of good feelings" ended, i can't remember the candidates I think it was Van Buren, andrew jackson, and someone else. Jackson won, establishing what is now the Republican party as a main party but at the time, was a third party. At least as much as I remember AP US history.