Comments on: Presidential Election 2008: Electoral Votes

By: !0rence

!0rence — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 06:04:53 +0000

yeah…

like someone had already stated our government should be chosen ForUsByUs
but first we’d need to conform to a homogeneous approach to the voting system
hat electoral system going on makes us feel like our viewpoint on the matter just doesn’t…matter.
give us some word!

plan 3′s definitely got my vote

By: Dana R

Dana R — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 04:53:26 +0000

As many others have said, why not let every vote count? It would encourage more people to turn out (presidential elections have, what, a 50% turnout?) and give each person an equal part of the democratic system. The current system can’t be changed before the next election–its too close, and would cause too much uproar, but is definately an idea for after the 08 evections.

By: jay B - NOrth

jay B - NOrth — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 02:34:23 +0000

I believe that the district voting will have a better result because the people in the district could have thier votes heared and it would be easier to count since the current voting system would Screw in the process

By: Francesca C.

Francesca C. — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 21:44:51 +0000

I think the popular vote would be the best one because if we go by the other plans than possibilities are that there can be a mistake when it comes to counting it. For example, it has been said that in the last president election President Bush only won because there was ONE point that led to his win. When in reality it was a tie. They said that Bush won because they did not want to go through the hassle of voting again. Therefor i think that the best way is the “popular plan” because it will show what of the majority of people want in a president. And there won’t be much conflict. That way results show more clearly on what the people need, and what are the strengths of the presidents that are running for presidency.

By: Stephanie V.

Stephanie V. — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:59:27 +0000

i think that we should leave it the way it is.
however, i do think that plan number two could work too because it seems fair that they get that amount of votes. i personally don’t like the electoral vote thing becuase i thnk we should just keep it to the popular vote.

By: Robert M.

Robert M. — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 07:21:12 +0000

The current electorial system, which has been in place for many year, has been tried and tested by time. It is easy to critisize the current system and point out faults but until it produce poor reasults, we should avoid ammending the constitution by changing the system. Idealy, we could creat a new perfect system on our first attempt however, things do not always work out as planned and we can not explore all the possible ramifications of our actions. Like the saying goes “If its not broken then don’t fix it”. This philosophy should also be implemented into our political system. Some possibly detrimental aspects of changing the election system are complications during tallying. We should leave things working the way they are rather then create new problems for ourselves

By: Danny

Danny — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 06:08:25 +0000

I like the idea of the District vote plan where you only get what you earned. This would probably encourage more people to vote because none of the votes would become meaningless and the candidate with the most electoral votes wouldn’t have all of them but only what he earned. To me it seems fair this way.

By: Traci K

Traci K — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 05:25:30 +0000

I guess out of the choices we have, I choose the district vote plan. Voters want to feel that their voice is heard. And it’s the closest way. And having the voters voices heard more, will make those who don’t vote, possibly want to vote knowing that their opinions actually count for something and are being taken into consideration.

By: Sam B

Sam B — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 04:32:11 +0000

I say out with the whole system. If I had my way, I’d do it oldschool – fight for what you believe in. Can you really tell how a person will act when all they do is talk? One of the first things we learn to do as children is to lie. Politicians are masters at talking about what they will do; how they will fight for us. But what is really shown in a debate? Quick thinking, persuasive creativity, and charm. The only true test of a person is a battle. Only the extreme pressure of a fight can bring out the truth in a person, so why should we even bother voting for someone who can talk there way into the presidency? I say we starve all the candidates, give them swords, throw them in a pit, and watch them fight it out. Then we vote on who we think has fought for their beliefs. All the clues to their reactions will be there – how they react to surprises, defeat, victory, and humiliation. Some will be quick to act and jump right in the fury, while others will sit back in cunning anticipation still planning their first move.

But other than that, I like the third choice – the Popular Vote Plan. Finally the voters get their voice heard. It should have been that way in the first place. The people, whether or not they make intelligent decisions, should be the ones electing their own president.

In another light, we’re still here aren’t we? It’s worked in the past and it’ll work in the future. Every plan has its own pros and cons. Never will there be a time when everyone is happy. But caution is advised. If we start changing the election process, then what’s to say that we won’t rewrite the Constitution and perhaps allow foreign-born hopefuls to run for president? This tiny change could blow-up to a catastrophe… or not.

By: Ryan N.

Ryan N. — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 03:43:11 +0000

im going to go with the majority which is number two, the direct vote. i really like that one out of the 4 the best. i think it is fair to everyone so you wont hear that many people complain about the voting system. i think the current system is pretty whack because the people that lost the vote will just go to the other president that they did not vote for. everyone vote counts to the right ppresident they want to be elected.