the republicans and our lop-sided electoral college

[MAC]

http://www.fec.gov/pages/ecmenu2.htm
---------------------
Each State is allocated a number of Electors equal to the number of its U.S. Senators (always 2) plus the number of its U.S. Representatives (which may change each decade according to the size of each State's population as determined in the Census).
---------------------
The political parties (or independent candidates) in each State submit to the State's chief election official a list of individuals pledged to their candidate for president and equal in number to the State's electoral vote. Usually, the major political parties select these individuals either in their State party conventions or through appointment by their State party leaders while third parties and independent candidates merely designate theirs.
---------------------
Whichever party slate wins the most popular votes in the State becomes that State's Electors-so that, in effect, whichever presidential ticket gets the most popular votes in a State wins all the Electors of that State. [The two exceptions to this are Maine and Nebraska where two Electors are chosen by statewide popular vote and the remainder by the popular vote within each Congressional district].
---------------------

there were 539 electoral votes in 2000

so consider that 6 of the top 7 electoral states have elected republican governors:

California--------54
New York--------33
Texas-------------32
Florida-----------25
Illinois------------22
Ohio--------------21

total-------------187

50 states
203,000,000 voters
111,000,000 actively vote (http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p20-542.pdf)

6 states = 35% of Electoral College and they all elected republican fiscal leaders this last election

I'd say the recall election was pretty important but I’m not making predictions, I just thought you might like the numbers

Please note that Pennsylvania has 23 electoral votes and it elected a Democrat loved by Al Gore and head of his states democratic party.


BTW:
------------------
In the event no one obtains an absolute majority of electoral votes for president, the U.S. House of Representatives (as the chamber closest to the people) selects the president from among the top three contenders with each State casting only one vote and an absolute majority of the States being required to elect. Similarly, if no one obtains an absolute majority for vice president, then the U.S. Senate makes the selection from among the top two contenders for that office.
------------------

[Lady Sianna]

the electoral process is bullshit.

it is not representative of my voice or my vote (and i wouldn't hestitate to say the same of millions of others).

the only fair & just way to elect an official is by an accurate tally of all votes entered by registered voters. Bush won the electoral votes and Gore won the popular vote. that means more people voted for Al Gore, but George Weasle Bush still became president. how fucked is that?

it inspires apathy and makes one believe that their vote truly does not matter.

how sad.

[SimpleSimon]

The electoral college was created originally as a compromise between the tyranny of the mob (direct election) and the tyranny of the aristocracy (the rich and powerful). It worked reasonably well, with some obvious problems.

The notion that the raw numbers of persons voting for the candidate for the presidency or the vice presidency has any meaningful status is a product of the media, and their habit of exit polling.

Whether or not the electors of any given state are bound to vote for the candidate receiving the majority of the votes in that state is up to state law. It is further complicated by the fact that most state laws that address the issue do not make allowance for situations in which the prevailing candidate wins by a plurality, which has happened a number of times. It is quite possible for a candidate not receiving the majority, or even a plurality, of the popular vote to be chosen by the electoral college as president.

The popular vote is frequently not the best method to manage democratic affairs - witness California this year.

[zim]

if this is a question of the electoral college, then let it be, don't claim that it's biased in favor of republicans.

if the top 6 states voted in republican governors, then that's a message from the people of those 6 states. it isn't a matter of lopsided. -- the scales are tipped in favor of the popular guy. the scales are tipped in favor of the winner, isn't that the whole point?

the problem with the electoral college is it minimizes the voice of those who voted with the majority in a single state. if those 6 states have very close elections, and one side barely wins out in those states, and there is a small margin for victory in the few other states needed for a candidate to win, it doesnt matter how much of the popular vote the other candidate gets in all of the states that he wins in. it's just the way the system is. it is rarely a problem, and has been considered relatively good because in the past it's caused candidates to campaign in the small states too. it was a means to get the smaller states involved.

[MAC]

sorry zim, I forgot to finish

you saw the cali recall?
70% of ppl voted

you've listened to ppl discuss sports?
watched movies?

ppl go one of two ways

#1 they want to see the winner stay the winner
#2 they want to see the underdog win

it all depends on whats popular....or too popular

right now it takes a maximum ratio of 1 in 5 ppl in each state to decide what the electoral college must do

but as you can see it takes a certain # of the larger states to win regardless of what the other 190M ppl in this nation think