posted
Thank them for creating a system where not only can a presidential election wind up in the quagmire it is now in, but it can do so peacefully, with no bloodshed and little more than peaceful demonstrations in front of court houses.
It is arguably the whole concept of an electoral college that has gotten us into this situation in the first place. The members of the constitutional Convention, in all their infinite wisdom, created a system whereby the states are asked to send electors to the electoral college (who decide the presidency) and are given complete freedom to decide how those electors are to be chosen. No doubt, the reasoning therein was to provide a buffer zone between the then relatively uneducated masses and the single most important decision our nation faces every four years. It also decreases the power of the federal government by giving the states more control over how the president is chosen. In those days, the states were very nearly semi-autonomous units, as close to being sovereign states as they could be without actually seceding from the union. With no Interstate commerce to speak of and no nation-wide communication systems, each state was allowed the freedom to do things the way it saw fit, since it wouldn't affect other states much, if at all.
After the onset of the industrial revolution (the US was a largely agrarian society before then), that became les and less the case. It was necessarily changed again more recently by the arrival of amazing communications technology and the globalization that was brought about by it. Television and the internet have revolutionized politics as much as any other aspect of society. If they so desire, people can easily become as informed about the actions of the legislature and other branches of government as the politicians themselves. Globalization has also brought about the standardization of education (and vast improvement over the old days, believe it or not). With the masses being both better educated and better informed, it is perhaps no longer necessary to so completely separate them from the process. It is also perhaps no longer necessary continue giving states artificially weighted preference in elections, as the electoral college undeniably does. States like Virginia, which always goes Republican, are ignored by the Democrats because it doesn't matter if they pick up an extra 5% when they no the margin is going to be 15% anyway (the same applies in historically Democratic states).
In this modern era of standardization it is very likely that a very strong push will be made, particularly in light of this election, to standardize the system and do away with the now obsolete electoral college. That would have a very interesting side-effect - it would make the presidential election a federal election to elect two officials, rather than a collection of state elections to elect slates of electors. That would force the process by which people actually vote for president to be changed. A good lawyer could argue that any nationwide election conduced on different type of voting machines is unconstitutional, particularly given the evidence of the tremendously higher failure rate seen in punchcard systems. We'd be forced to standardize the entire system, most likely on federal money, so that all voters have an equal right to vote. While that would be extraordinarily expensive, it would probably be the single most important improvement in the history of our democracy. That is the only way that a fair and accurate election can be guaranteed, assuming the best machine is chosen as the standard (more on that later).
This election has pulled the flaws of the electoral college (which the framers of the constitution could not possibly have seen, given the unimaginable social, economic, and political changes brought about by the industrial revolution, and now the information revolution) into the limelight. It will no doubt result in massive changes to the system itself, probably even a constitutional amendment. Even more important than the exposure of the flaws in the current system, however, is the demonstration of how incredibly well the rest of the system works.
Contrary to Don Imus's remarks that the wheels are about to fall off of the nation, we have seen how well the system was designed to work even in the event of a full blown political crisis. There are no violent riots, no bloodshed, no threats to take office by force, nothing but a cut and dry, orderly legal contest. There are no fears about what will happen next, everyone knows exactly what each court is doing and which one will see which part of it next. Nothing extralegal has been done in the contest, nor will it, as the very nature of the system would cause the candidate who tried it would automatically be assured of a loss.
We are very fortunate to have a system so well designed that it can sustain a lengthy contest of the election for the highest office in the land with no signs of stress. The worst thing we have seen is a single radio talk show host making a comment purely for the sake of getting a few laughs (at which he is succeeding, I might add).
We have a system so well designed that something like this can happen and everyone can still laugh about it without fear. We can rest easy in the knowledge that those things which are broken can be pointed out and fixed so freely. For all its faults, we have arguably the best system of government the world has ever seen because it is so dynamic and changeable while still retaining it basic principles of freedom ad democracy. I urge you all to remember this election not only as the biggest screw-up in the history of our nation, but as the greatest demonstration of how such a screw-up can be corrected without difficulty. Remember it well; your grandchildren will ask you what it was like when they read about it in their history books.
posted
That's what we've had for quite some time, now. It's just that the GOP refuses to fight back. The Democratic Party has seen it as a war for quite a while.
------------------ "You know, you--you let a wolf save your life, they make you pay and pay and pay..." - Fraser, "due South"
posted
In the most abstract sense, we actually do have a sort of civil war every four years. The polls merely serve as the peacefull exression of that war. That expression through voting is why we don't heave real phisical civil war, why we have a peace change of power every four years insted of a bloodbath.
Better that than the bunch of Commu-fascistic, misguided, fetus-chopping, murderer coddling, china-sucking, intern-**cking, coke-snorting, lying, race-baiting, constitution-shredding illegitimate "children of the revolution" who, despite all their prattling about equality, won't be opening the gated communities of West Hollywood and Beverly Hills to those same underpriveleged people anytime soon.
Be careful what you start.
------------------ "Ed Gruberman, you fail to grasp Ty Kwan Leap. Approach me, that you might see." -- The Master
First, my above statement was directed at the heirarchy of the GOP, and not you. To the best of my knowledge, they are white, rich, disapprove of the homosexual lifestyle, and I'm sure quite a few are racist.
In response to your points (ravings?):
Commu-fascistic
Communism is a form of government which does not work. There are things within communism which do work, same with democracy (some things work, some don't). By insulting people who want to improve the system -- well, I guess that's your right, 1st Ammendment and all ...
misguided
Because they don't think like you? Yeah, that's a GREAT argument ...
coke-snorting
No, Clinton smoked but he never inhaled. Get your drug stories correct ... this is Dubya you're talking about here.
intern-**-ucking
Lots of people fuck, First. Senator Packwood, for one. Have you never had sex? He who throws the first stone ...
china-sucking
Would you include Dick Nixon in here? I don't see what the problem is by trying to make friendly with a potentially enemy nation. Maybe we should just nuke 'em first though, huh?
murder-coddling
Because they prefer rehabilitation to execution?
fetus chopping
It's not your body, hand's off.
lying
Um ... I don't think any politician is innocent of this ...
race-baiting
Sorta like Ted Danson's "blackface" routine at a Republican fundraiser ... what, ten years ago now? Hmmm. Doesn't this sorta go to the point of the Republican leadership being racist? I dunno ...
consitution-shredding
Last thing I knew, it was still in one piece in a glass case somewhere in DC ...
illegitimate children of the revolution
That ended quite a few years ago. I don't think any of their children are alive anymore, legitimate or not.
[This message has been edited by JeffKardde (edited December 07, 2000).]
posted
Rob, correct me if I'm wrong on any of this.
"Commu-facistic" is refering to a combination of communism and facism. Communism has become misdefined over the years, yes, but when a word is used to mean a specific thing for so long, it then means that thing, because that is the meaning communicated by the word. Thus, "communist" in contemporary language means what "socialist" meant when it was coined.
Moving on, let us define the term. I'm going to guess that what Fo2 meant by this was a system in which business interests had great influence in a government which controls the lives of the non-elite. This would seem to be a reasonable synthesis of socialism and fascism.
What would happen if the Democratic party got everything it wanted? Analyze programs such as HillaryCare and deduce the possible results of their implementation. How would you describe the resulting society?
"misguided
Because they don't think like you? Yeah, that's a GREAT argument ..."
That's not what he said. Why did you assume that that was what he meant?
"coke-snorting
No, Clinton smoked but he never inhaled. Get your drug stories correct ... this is Dubya you're talking about here."
Why did you change the subject to Bush? Why do you believe Bush used drugs?
"china-sucking
Would you include Dick Nixon in here? I don't see what the problem is by trying to make friendly with a potentially enemy nation. Maybe we should just nuke 'em first though, huh?"
Why do you favor friendly relations with a government that killed thousands of people for no reason?
"murder-coddling
Because they prefer rehabilitation to execution?"
Have you heard of any successful rehabilitations of a murderer that could have been exectued?
"fetus chopping
It's not your body, hand's off."
Does this apply to Siamese twins, as well?
"lying
Um ... I don't think any politician is innocent of this ..."
Can you think of an instance where George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, et al. lied to the people of the country?
"race-baiting
Sorta like Ted Danson's "blackface" routine at a Republican fundraiser ... what, ten years ago now? Hmmm. Doesn't this sorta go to the point of the Republican leadership being racist? I dunno ..."
Why do you change the subject to something completely unrelated? Why do you not respond to the accusation that the DNC is involved in race-baiting?
"consitution-shredding
Last thing I knew, it was still in one piece in a glass case somewhere in DC ..."
Why do you not respond to the accusation that the DNC disregards the constitution when inconvenient?
------------------ "You know, you--you let a wolf save your life, they make you pay and pay and pay..." - Fraser, "due South"
Really, I don't see why anyone bothers with little arrogant narrow-minded pricks like you. It's a waste of effort.
------------------ "Karate is a form of martial arts in which people who have had years and years of training can, using only their hands and feet, make some of the worst movies in the history of the world." - Dave Barry
posted
I don't think anyone's got the better of anyone else.
This is all just the same thing OVER and OVER again.
No one wins, no one loses, They just think they do.
It's all just annoying.
------------------ "Karate is a form of martial arts in which people who have had years and years of training can, using only their hands and feet, make some of the worst movies in the history of the world." - Dave Barry
Printer-friendly view of this topic
