2007-02-04 08:37:36 · 8 answers · asked by Brotherhood 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Good Question!
2007-02-04 08:41:31 · answer #1 · answered by MaryAnn K 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
My feeling is that the actual vote count should rule. Delegates were needed during the early years and were to abide by the the majority of their districts which did not always hold true. They would sometimes go the opposite way. Today we have no need for them as we are able to vote in our districts. Now, the Supreme Court is made up of Judges that were appointed mostly along party lines by the then sitting president. In this case our Illustrious Pres. Bush was given the vote. But he did not gain the popular vote. So why should
we vote???????Good question!!!!!
2007-02-04 16:55:07 · answer #2 · answered by dVille 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well, since I don't think the Supreme Court has ever appointed a president, I will continue to vote. If you think otherwise, you are right, don't bother. I urge everyone who thinks the Supreme Court has ever appointed a president to not vote in 2008.
2007-02-04 20:39:41 · answer #3 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
If your AMERICAN you know that the Supreme Court does NOT appoint the President. Dumb A....
If you don't vote oh well. Your choice loses.
Just continue to stay home on election day and the rest of us will go vote and you and the rest of your kool aid drinkers can do what you do well. COMPLAIN.
2007-02-04 17:03:45 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Oh give it a rest. Your guy lost a juridical decision. The Supreme Court ruled - as they are supposed to, according to the Constitution - on the merits of a question that influenced the outcome of the election.
The election decided the Presidency. It was conducted according to the law of the land. As, we hope, will be the next one. If you don't bother to vote, that will be your choice. If the last election proved anything, it is that individual votes ARE important.
Sheesh.
2007-02-04 16:43:24 · answer #5 · answered by Uncle John 6 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Hey, and since Democrats think the Supreme court should be able to pass laws and tell the president what he can and can't do when it comes to defending the country, why don't we just eliminate the executive and legislative branches of government?
Get a clue. The Supreme Court appointed no one.
2007-02-04 16:46:02 · answer #6 · answered by Daniel A: Zionist Pig 3 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Are you still on that old bunch of bilge? Of course you are, it is part of the Democratic mantra. Never thought about, just recited.
2007-02-04 16:54:22 · answer #7 · answered by istitch2 6 · 0⤊ 5⤋
I've always said, liberals should just stay home on election day!
2007-02-04 16:41:10 · answer #8 · answered by briang731/ bvincent 6 · 1⤊ 4⤋