English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I think the common man has Not a chance as :::He does not have the money to run? So, what can be done to change this?

2007-01-25 01:18:41 · 7 answers · asked by Gypsy Gal 6 in Politics & Government Elections

7 answers

I would count the popular votes and dump the electoral college.

Any American native should be able to run for president regardless of their wealth status.

This would be a much more Democratic way.

.

2007-01-25 01:25:00 · answer #1 · answered by Brotherhood 7 · 0 0

I believe in the Electoral College; but, the two major political parties have freaked it up by changing rules for electors from every state but Maine and Nebraska.

Originally, the elector from each congressional district would cast their Electoral College ballot for the candidate who won that district. Then, the two statewide electors (representing the two Senatorial districts), would vote for the candidate who had won the statewide vote.

That allowed third party candidates to make a difference, since a state like Teksis, with 34 Representatives could have 10 for a Repugnantan, 14 for a Demograt, and 12 for the American Party candidate. Then, the candidate who also won the statewide total (which may or may not be the Demograt) would get the two votes representing the Senators.

In Maine and Nebraska, they still do it that way; but, in every other state, the greedy parties have insisted on Winner Take All. That means that when Brush loses narrowly in 28 of 34 districts; but wins big in the remaining 6, he gets all 34, PLUS the two electors representing the Senatorial districts.

It allowed Brush to LOSE THE POPULAR VOTE BUT WIN THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTE.

That's why I would change it. I think the Electoral College, as originally conceived, was a stroke of genius. It's the rule rigging of the two parties that has made it fail to keep its promise.

2007-01-26 01:50:19 · answer #2 · answered by View from a horse 3 · 0 0

It's worked for 200 years and produced the finest of the finest until "Mr. Dementia" Jimmy Carter got elected, the one term wonder who did more damage to the image of America than any
President next to LBJ!!

But imbeciles can slip through the cracks and Carter was the biggest next to Slick Willy Clinton and his new definition of the word "is" not to mention his extra-curricular activities in the Oval office with Monica , i.e. inserting $20.00 cigars in her Vagina and twirling... and the face sitting sessions she confessed to! Ahh to be Liberal and Addicted to sex AND to have such and understanding Lesbian wife!!

How would I change it? Begin by sending all Far Left Wing ACLU Adoring Hyper-Liberals and their Gay-Lesbian agendas to Nancy Pelosi's house and lock the doors?

2007-01-25 09:44:26 · answer #3 · answered by baltic072 3 · 0 0

There should be a series of debates with anyone running welcome to join. Third party candidates are always shut out. NO TV commercials, or radio airplay allowed. Majority vote wins. NO electronic voting machines. Candidates should only be allowed to advertise themselves in person...in towns across America.

2007-01-25 09:25:36 · answer #4 · answered by mizzpatriot 2 · 0 0

Get rid of the electoral vote

2007-01-25 11:57:34 · answer #5 · answered by cwigg 3 · 0 0

Internet voting.

2007-01-25 09:21:46 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

One candidate from each state and a required swimsuit competition.

2007-01-25 09:22:39 · answer #7 · answered by Chief BaggageSmasher 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers