[Grovenet] Dependent or Independent? (WAS: A DifferentChristmasPoem)

[Ron D'Eau Claire]

How is that different from requiring a majority of the ballots be cast for
the winner? 

First, we need to get the electoral college out of the way! 

Then why not have a runoff if no one gets a majority of votes cast, not just
the most votes? Actually, that should be the "majority plus the margin of
error". So, if we can't count votes within 2%, the winner must have more
than 52% of the ballots cast. 

I still have my Periot button. When he announced his Vice Presidential
candidate, my first reaction was "He just threw the election! I wonder who
got to him?" 

I'm still wondering. Of course he might have been so naïve to think people
didn't care who was just a "heartbeat" away from the Oval office. Silly,
silly Ross.

Ron D'Eau Claire 



-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Steven
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 10:13 AM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Dependent or Independent? (WAS: A
DifferentChristmasPoem)


Lets See.
I can't remember 76. I think I voted for carter.
"The 1976 election was only the second time since 1944 that a Democrat
managed to obtain a majority of the popular vote in a Presidential Election,
as Carter received 50.1% of the vote. " Anderson in 80. Bergland In 84 Paul
in 88. In 92 I went with Perot. 96 was picking the one that had the best
chance to beat clinton.


-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
Behalf Of David Morelli
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 10:42 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Dependent or Independent? (WAS: A Different
ChristmasPoem)



On Dec 14, 2007, at 9:00 PM, Steven wrote:

> I voted third pary for most of my life. Bill Clinton's first election 
> was the first to force me to make an anti-vote. I find it quite 
> distasteful to be voting for what I feel is the lesser of two evils 
> instead of the better. I call it Least Objectionable Candidate.
>
Gosh, we share that history.  How thought provoking.  I wonder if we voted
for any of the same third party candidates?  Did you vote for Ron Paul when
he last ran?

Anyway, again, I propose that we allow negative votes to be counted as
negatives against the target candidate.  You cast one vote, either for one
candidate or against one candidate, and the one with the greatest positive
vote wins.  If no one has a positive total, the position is handled as a
vacancy.  That should reduce the negative campaigns.  In a field of
candidates, the winner must attract votes.

David
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet