Subj : Re: Two Party System
To   : Daemon
From : Tracker1
Date : Sun Aug 28 2005 22:38:00

Daemon wrote:
>   The EC could actually be debated very strongly either way, but let's remember
> something here...  There's only ONE RACE in the country that isn't a DIRECT
> democratic process.  Everything but the presidency, thousands and thousands of
> contests EVERY year, is OUR fault ENTIRELY (though, for brevity, I'm not
> expanding on how that direct mechanism itself has even, over time, become a
> more or less mechanism for guaranteeing 2-party superiority).

I'm in favor of the EC, simply because the ratio does give some level of 
balance to the smaller states in terms of population, I wouldn't mind seeing a 
split of the electors based on the popular votes in each state though. I think 
Colorado, and one other state do this but I beleive that should be left to 
each state to decide as it is now.

> --snip-- <
>   *drums fingers*  Sorry, guys.  This is a passionate cause of mine, and I
> could literally write books on it.  lol  I'm actually trying not to be
> long-winded and preachy...  Can't help it.

Same here, why I only replied to that one part.. I beleive in the electoral 
college process, but think there are some things that could be adjusted a bit 
which would help a lot... I just don't want to see the states themselves lose 
even more influence in general... Especially considering most of the lands 
that need some level of preservation are in the least populated states...

-- 
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1(at)theroughnecks(dot)net - www.theroughnecks.net
icq: 4935386  -  AIM/AOL: azTracker1  -  Y!: azTracker1  -  MSN/Win: (email)

---
 þ Synchronet þ theroughnecks.net - you know you want it

.