Page 4 of 4
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 7:25 am
by Ishtar
OK ...from the other side of the pond, can I relay the impression we receive?
Just two words: 'hanging chads'.
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 7:46 am
by Forum Monk
"Hanging chads" Why does that sound so funny?
Considering a national election, there are millions of votes cast in thousands of districts and all in all, in spite of all the potential for problems to abound, we have managed for the last 250 odd years to get through it. There seems to be no fool-proof method of managing it but the best systems include a method to audit results. The hanging chads are a clear example of a method which failed in spite of being used successfully for several decades. Of course, some may claim that was a conspiracy. Consider as well, in this country, presidents are elected by an electoral college, not the popular vote.
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 7:52 am
by Ishtar
It does sound funny, doesn't it? Especially that a national election could be won or lost over them!
Forum Monk wrote: Consider as well, in this country, presidents are elected by an electoral college, not the popular vote.
Over here, opposition parties never win elections. Governments lose them ...as this one would now if we went to the polls.
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 7:59 am
by Digit
I've been trying to convince people of that that for years Ish. Given enough time all parties fall apart and the roundabout starts again.
Labour maintain that they needed Blair to win, in 1997 Labour would have won if Churchill had been the leader!
Blair got out before his rep was totally shredded, the sign of a competant politician or heavyweight boxing champion!
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 9:13 am
by Minimalist
There seems to be no fool-proof method of managing
Of course not....fools are too ingenious.
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 11:45 am
by kbs2244
You want to talk about a rigged Supreme Court?
Research FDR!
Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:10 am
by dannan14
kbs2244 wrote:You want to talk about a rigged Supreme Court?
Research FDR!
i'm surprised the Bushies haven't tired to steal that play from FDR's book. i'm glad FDR was unsuccessful, otherwise the Supreme Court would now have more Justices than Congress has members.
Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 11:02 am
by Minimalist
They have tried and they've done pretty well packing the court with business-friendly, civil-rights despising, pricks.
Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 2:19 pm
by dannan14
Minimalist wrote:They have tried and they've done pretty well packing the court with business-friendly, civil-rights despising, pricks.
But at least there are still only nine of them
Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:21 pm
by Minimalist
Well, yeah....I suppose we can be thankful for small favors!