considering I got a thumbs down on a question regarding Pakistani human rights, I don't think there is a common denominator...we can't even agree that rape is wrong. sad...
2006-09-12 05:30:30
·
answer #1
·
answered by hichefheidi 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
If everyone agreed, there wouldn't be a need to vote, would there?
That would be a bad situation, though, since the best ideas come out of some of the most intense arguments. The Constitution is the best example of that.
2006-09-12 12:34:32
·
answer #2
·
answered by rustyshackleford001 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
It would take having only 1 candidate. And even then, people would write in other options.
There is no way to get everyone to vote the same, and this is America - the land of the free - where everyone is entitled to their own opinion. If everyone was the same, there would be no creativity.
2006-09-12 12:44:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by Leah 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
For everyone to vote the same wwe would all have to be the same..... personally I think our differences are what make the world an interesting place.
2006-09-12 12:42:42
·
answer #4
·
answered by S G 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It will never happen. There are people I call opposers in this society. They will choose the opposite of whatever is popular. There will never be a consensus. The proof of this is feminist groups who hate Bush even though he deposed the woman hating Taliban. They hate Bush more than they love themselves.
2006-09-12 12:33:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
that would happen unless you were Iran or even Iraq tens years ago having elections only then can everyone vote for 100% of the same person.
2006-09-12 12:31:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
A one-party, one candidate system. It's called a dictatorship, as in Idi Amin.
2006-09-12 12:30:33
·
answer #7
·
answered by Harris 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
They already do. There is no significant difference between the two parties.
2006-09-12 12:29:55
·
answer #8
·
answered by C B 6
·
0⤊
1⤋