Clinton Interview on Fox News

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Soo... Canadians can't comment on the electoral college because they're Canadian? Does that mean no one from anywhere can debate the electoral college's merits unless they're an American? That sounds prejudiced.

Not what I said. I said a Canadian calling the US system UNDEMOCRATIC is asinine. It is much more DEMOCRATIC than the parliamentary system in Canada. Is it better? That's open for debate, but..
It is much more DEMOCRATIC than here.
Do you see what I'm saying now?

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by White Doors

Not what I said. I said a Canadian calling the US system UNDEMOCRATIC is asinine. It is much more DEMOCRATIC than the parliamentary system in Canada. Is it better? That's open for debate, but..
It is much more DEMOCRATIC than here.
Do you see what I'm saying now?

Not really. You said Flash had no points to be made. He had many. You then called me a troll for correcting you. I'm not too worried though; looking at recent posts it appears your shot credibility is well known around here. And I'm the troll... laughable!

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by White Doors

It is much more DEMOCRATIC than here.
Do you see what I'm saying now?

Using larger font doesn't make your asinine position any less foolish. If you think the electoral college process is more democratic, tell us why.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

Using larger font doesn't make your asinine position any less foolish. If you think the electoral college process is more democratic, tell us why.

Pfft... asking for real debate is troll-talk. Get out of here you troll!

[White Doors]

Settle down children.
Their whole electoral system is more democratic. They vote for their prosecuters, their sherrifs, individual legislation, etc. Their electoral college may be able to use some improvements, but calling their system undemocratic because of the electoral college is invalid.
(One might even say pointless)

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by White Doors

Settle down children.
Their whole electoral system is more democratic. They vote for their prosecuters, their sherrifs, individual legislation, etc. Their electoral college may be able to use some improvements, but calling their system undemocratic because of the electoral college is invalid.
(One might even say pointless)

Then why don't you refute all the points he made? He produced many occasions as to why the electoral college is a flawed system.

I think you refuse to adress his points because you can't. All you can do is say "well, Canada's system is flawed too".

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by White Doors

Settle down children.
Their whole electoral system is more democratic. They vote for their prosecuters, their sherrifs, individual legislation, etc. Their electoral college may be able to use some improvements, but calling their system undemocratic because of the electoral college is invalid.
(One might even say pointless)

Yeah... I'd be real happy if my sherrif was the best politician in town rather than the best cop in town...

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Barnes

Your statements were flawed. The way in which the two systems work is not an "issue". There is not two sides to choose from in which to argue. We were not debating which system is better. The way they function is the way the function.

He also gave some good examples of facts that tend to make your previous statments a little shakey.

I was never arguing about the Canadian system AT ALL. The only thing I said there was in response to the assertion that the US system is undemocratic. That was a Glass House statement and I pointed it out. Nothing more.

He didn't address my statements head on, he dismissed them.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Soo... Canadians can't comment on the electoral college because they're Canadian? Does that mean no one from anywhere can debate the electoral college's merits unless they're an American? That sounds prejudiced.

At this point in the thread I would just like to point out that the above does not reflect my views. This is something that came alive after I had my say.

POINT OF INFORMATION ONLY. NOT TO BE TAKEN AS ANYTHING ELSE

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

Using larger font doesn't make your asinine position any less foolish. If you think the electoral college process is more democratic, tell us why.

At this point in the thread I would like to point out that my use of larger font on the post above was designed for the sole purpose of ensuring that the text in question was seen and read. It was not designed to make me look any less foolish.

POINT OF INFORMATION ONLY. NOT TO BE TAKEN OTHERWISE.

*please see above for explanation on use of larger font.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by White Doors

Settle down children.
Their whole electoral system is more democratic. They vote for their prosecuters, their sherrifs, individual legislation, etc.

Not everywhere. Local officials come into their positions in a wide variety of ways depending on the locale.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Yeah... I'd be real happy if my sherrif was the best politician in town rather than the best cop in town...

A good point, but sometimes a good sheriff is perfectly capable of running a good political campaign on a local level. It is not an either/or situation.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

A good point, but sometimes a good sheriff is perfectly capable of running a good political campaign on a local level. It is not an either/or situation.

Positions of authority like that i.e. Judges, you want them to uphold the law and be prepared to make some unpopular decisions - which could compromise their objectivity if they are looking over their shoulder to see if they are going to be re-elected.

However, I do agree they should be accountable as well.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

I was never arguing about the Canadian system AT ALL. The only thing I said there was in response to the assertion that the US system is undemocratic. That was a Glass House statement and I pointed it out. Nothing more.

He didn't address my statements head on, he dismissed them.

I am only replying to you because what you're saying is patently false. You made the assertion that one vote in the electoral college system was not more valuable than any other in the country. I replied by saying your assertion was false, and then backed my position with an argument. There are countless other examples of well researched positions I have taken in this thread, though I won't repeat them because they've been stated previously. Saying I simply dismissed your positions is partially correct, but that's because the evidence which I have spent a good deal of my life studying, proves you wrong, evidence not only supported by me, but by 4 other Presidents who have been elected by the very same electoral college which they have later opposed outright.

If you're unwilling to 'debate' further, just say so. Don't say it's a waste of time only to continue the 'debate', while continuing to argue how invalid my positions are with other posters (while refusing to address any points I make, directly to me), using falsehoods and lies that are easily seen as what they are by refering to the ACTUAL DOCUMENTATION in this very thread, a couple of pages prior.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Positions of authority like that i.e. Judges, you want them to uphold the law and be prepared to make some unpopular decisions - which could compromise their objectivity if they are looking over their shoulder to see if they are going to be re-elected.

However, I do agree they should be accountable as well.

District and local judges gain the bench in a variety of ways too, depending on the locale. I am a lot more uncomfortable with electing judges than I am with say, Sheriff.

On the other hand, as you said, having to be re-elected every couple of years keeps them from doing really stupid things.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

District and local judges gain the bench in a variety of ways too, depending on the locale. I am a lot more uncomfortable with electing judges than I am with say, Sheriff.

On the other hand, as you said, having to be re-elected every couple of years keeps them from doing really stupid things.

Yeah, its kind of a double edged sword. I remember having to write a paper on it, but I think the most effective system would be with appointed judges with a proper system of accountability, however, I'm really not sure what that is.

I don't really think popular elections are the way to go, especially when some people elect on political views.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I am only replying to you because what you're saying is patently false. You made the assertion that one vote in the electoral college system was not more valuable than any other in the country. I replied by saying your assertion was false, and then backed my position with an argument. There are countless other examples of well researched positions I have taken in this thread, though I won't repeat them because they've been stated previously. Saying I simply dismissed your positions is partially correct, but that's because the evidence which I have spent a good deal of my life studying, proves you wrong, evidence not only supported by me, but by 4 other Presidents who have been elected by the very same electoral college which they have later opposed outright.

If you're unwilling to 'debate' further, just say so. Don't say it's a waste of time only to continue the 'debate', while continuing to argue how invalid my positions are with other posters (while refusing to address any points I make, directly to me), using falsehoods and lies that are easily seen as what they are by refering to the ACTUAL DOCUMENTATION in this very thread, a couple of pages prior.

It was a waste of time to start the argument. That wasn't simply something I said to 'get out of it' as you infer. I'm a busy guy, believe it or not. I work 6 days a week and usually 10 hours a day. I have a wife and 2 kids. I have 2 mortgages. Spending an hour typing something that I felt was totally ignored IS a waste of time to me. That is where that line was born.

I never once said that ANY of your points were invalid, save the phrase 'utter joke' in your initial post. You actually made some great points. Now that you have decided to officially call me a liar my conscience tells me that we should just shut this one down. I'm not here to make enemies and don't want an argument like this to prevent discussions on other topics with you, although its probably too late for that as you have clearly shown you see yourself on a much higher intellectual plane than I. However, that would surely be seen just how you probably want it seen...that I'm running away from you because I was 'owned' as the kids like to say. So, a bit of a pickle I am in.

By the way, which President are you?


I maintain that no one electoral vote is any less important than any other. I maintain this contention based on logic. In any given election, electoral votes can end up being more important than others. They don't start out that way though.

You mentioned the case of Florida in 2000. The only reason Florida became an issue is because of the way other states fell. In 2000, Al Gore won the state of New Mexico and its 5 EV's by 366 votes. He won the state of Iowa and its 7 EV's by 4110 votes. Gore won Wisconsin and its 11 EV's by 5,396 votes. 3 extremely close states. If Bush turns those states his way then Florida isn't important at all. It only became important because of the way the other states fell. So to suggest that a candidate must get a certain state in order to win because it is the most important is simply not true, except in hindsight when all of the other states results can be included in the anaysis.

The electoral college actually doubles the voting power of some small states. Montana has around .35% of the total population of the US, but it's electoral vote is .69% of the total. I'll grant you that this is probably way more important in Congress than it is in a Presidential election. The point remains, however, that the electoral college gives at least some power back to the smaller states.

I'd love to hear ideas for a new system. No, its not required that you come up with one, but given your dedication to the study of American History (guessing, maybe it is Political Science) you may already have ideas. I'd love to hear them.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

I don't really think popular elections are the way to go, especially when some people elect on political views.

Exactly. Too many people are out there voting the 'conscience of their party' for that to work. A district judge's opinion on abortion should be irrelevant. Actually, it is irrelevant.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

I was never arguing about the Canadian system AT ALL. The only thing I said there was in response to the assertion that the US system is undemocratic. That was a Glass House statement and I pointed it out. Nothing more.

He didn't address my statements head on, he dismissed them.

I know you weren't but you did make some false statements in regards to the Canadian system. That is all.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Wow, looks like people are finally cluing in to White Doors pathetic act. Bravo all!