This is a cheap solution to a bigger problem. Why make this anemic move to "adjust" the electoral college problem, when we should just abolish it altogether, or use the National Popular Vote plan - being debated in NC right now - and have actual PEOPLE choose the president.
I'm glad to liked the post. I'm curious if you share a lot of the sentiment about him that said he was terribly vein or arrogant or what have you. I began reading one of the two Sagan biographies, but couldn't get past the first few chapters because of its exceptionally poor, kindergartener-like writing style, but the thesis even at the outset seemed to be that he was, well not so great, scientifically or otherwise. I'm happy with my own impressions of him from my own readings and viewings, but do you have any thoughts?
I seriously don't understand the hostility to this pick. I mean, I think the point is a celebration of the user-created web, and we're all happy about that...right? But if everybody just wants to get snobby about it, that's fine. That's a lot of fun. Shows how superior we all are. Right?
What do you do if both the Republican and Democratic candidates are unacceptable to you? There are obvious examples, like the Dem is corrupt or something, but what if a 3rd party candidate simply shares your values more, or would clearly be a better holder of the office in question? I ask out of genuine curiosity of what one should do in that circumstance, given the rules.
This example in and of itself doesn't convince me that IRV is bad news. In fact, most counter examples have only reinforced for me that the candidates that lost simply should have done a better job. I'm sure there are problems, though, and I have put a considerable amount of support behind IRV, so I very much want to know if I have backed the wrong horse. So far, I don't think I have.
Well, no, because when Nader is eliminated, which is what will happen, his support goes to Kerry. If Nader becomes an amazing candidate and gets a lot more people to vote for him, well, bully for him, and shame on Kerry for not making his case! Right?
Is it now, however, always contingent upon a third party candidate, just as with a major party, to make their case to the voters? In the end, don't we really have to rely on the candidates to do their persuading, and if Nader voters or Kerry voters pick Bush for their second choice, that is a fault of the campaigns and not the voting system?
I doubt that GOP candidates will refrain from ripping him a new one in the heat of a primary. McCain wasn't ready, and he looked like a pompus ass for sure. But that wasn't Giuliani's aura, that was McCain not having thought about that particular grilling and his reluctance to engage in a candid discussion.
I agree, and I have to imagine there is a lot of coaching going on right now at the McCain camp. For Rudy, I can't help but think that if he has the right people in his campaign, his story can be told the way he wants it told. Surely, he has enormous odds, but I don't think he can be dismissed.