I feel like I'm really missing something here — nonetheless, I'll answer anyway. Assuming you're talking about a percentage of the popular vote (you don't specify a percentage of anything), I say zero percent, because electors are not obligated to cast their votes according to who wins the plurality of votes in their respective state. I believe this is how George Washington was elected each of his two runs for president.
I think it's one of the biggest problems the country faces. Unfortunately only a scant portion of the population realizes how much this problem negatively affects them. Agreed. I think the average standard of living would eventually be significantly improved if this resolution became reality nationwide. Agreed. What ultimately leads to the downfall of the country will likely be this. I think the founding fathers made a mistake by not anticipating this problem. They created a system that has a fatal, practically irreversible flaw. (They still get kudos though for doing so much right.) If ever a democracy again rises from the ashes of the US, let's hope the people remember their history and fix this problem.
Althelwulf There is no such thing as true democracy, the same way there is no such thing as pure water in nature(can only be found in labs), democracy is something more like aristocratic dictatorship. Lately John Kerry is in trouble over his speech. I think the poor guy really directed it at the president. But everybody wants an apology. If soldiers really had feelings, what are they doing killing other people in the first place. Strangely Hipocritical. Just wanted to put an input on this thread
Don't matter what you think, it's what he said! And he should be in trouble for it. Fuck Kerry!! Different feelings, you idiot! Baron Max
Must be .....the Muslim terrrorist seem to be doing it every fuckin' day! They've also done it in Russia and in the Phillippines and in Israel and in Pakistan, too. So, yeah, it must be okay, huh? Baron Max
"If soldiers really had feelings, what are they doing killing other people in the first place." Oh I don't know... could be uh... trying not to die? Perhaps defending people that might be about to die? Crazy talk, I know. Oh, and irrelevant to the thread.
You know that reply still doesn't change anything. Besides who are the people about to die? Is it the 300,000 people that saddam allegedly murdered with no real proof? or is it the Americans who have experienced relative peace than many war torn countries for the last 50 years. Some people think that the retaliation American troops face in Iraq are actual terrorists..Try not to be fuckin stupid(not you)...there is no way you will march into another man's country and not expect some retaliation. Besides, a dictator is the least of America's problems, millions of people are suffering and dying in Dafur, Burma, Ethiopia, just to name a few. You can never completely stop the carnage all over the world, you can do it at your own will and choosing but you can never stop it, just like its impossible to stop the war on terror. More American troops have died than the number of people that did not survive 911, that in many courts is indirect murder(there is a legal word for it but I can't remember). Besides are you going to tell me that if Bush tells the troops to throw themselves into fire they will obey? Soldiers are nothing but tools.
Your statement was refuted and instead of owning up to it or demonstrating falseness, you meander along on a mislead, angst-ridden rant. I see little point in indulging you. It would be nice if you'd actually contemplate the subject of the thread and comment on it.
Don't you think a lot of people have better things to do than deliberate over an apology? Besides you never refuted any notion, your motion was to bring a new idea to the table but you failed to see that it still did not change the fact that the people who supposedly have feelings are also killing other people in what is probably an unreasoble unecessary war. Maybe its because America has never experieced any real war, a lot of people think war is a game or some sort of joke. Maybe you'd care about the feelings of a person that detonates a bomb on your sister's face, tearing it to pieces, blood everywhere, her brains on the kitchen floor, thats a nightmare to me. We sent this people to Iraq, a place thats probably little less of an ambush, most of them 17-20 years old, only for us to now start crying crocodile tears. Just what we need, softening our already war fatigued troops with all these concerns. Soldiers are not the only low I.Q school drop- outs; Successful musicians, Restaurant owners, and Sport athlets are often in the same bracket. Shouldn't we be apologizing for them too? Besides, many high ranked military officials are very successful.
You want to fix elections and have them mean something? Simple: Take 80% of the Federal Taxes and give them back to the States. The remaining 20% can go to the Military and all the lesser needs of government. With that enormous amount of income each local and state election will be important and people will actually care. No more pork barrel politics. My Cali dollars are not going to some stupid park in New York. 3rd and 4th Parties will become extremely important since the Federal Level Congressional current 2 Party Crap will become worthless since they no longer control all the money. States Rights. Just how it was meant to be.
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/05db06co.xls Look at California's payout to the IRS in 2005: $265,783,657,000 California's State Budget in 2005: Aprox $90 Billion Take our 80% of $265.7 Billion....$212.56 Billion... Which Gives California a 2005 Budget of $292.56 BILLION. A slight increase to say the least. Thats $212 BILLION in additional funding that we the PEOPLE of California get to decide what to spend on because its OUR MONEY. States rights...its the only way it will work.
Just thought I would add that while the thought of California voters having control of that much money is extremely Scary (maybe we would buy Mexico...), its just as frightfull as some retard like Kerry or Hillary becoming president.
Maybe because there is no real difference between them. But according to your logic, the best way would be to have a dictator or king, thus ALL the voting process could be eliminated, because chosing is such a hard work... All those European countries with (for God's sake!!) 4-8 parties, voters must be using an 8 ball to decide whom to vote for... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
