Who would the world vote for?

Meadows

check this out
dont forget to vote yourself

http://betavote.com/


may also be amused by
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=197298

spooiirt!!

Come on Kerry!!

Rredwell

The only problem is that betavote.com calculates results based on the popular vote. In the US, results are decided (in theory at least) by the Electoral College, which complicates matters.

magick

im guessing the world/reality wants Kerry in , but it looks doubtful thank you very much Electoral College system, actually we have a Dublin man to blame for that since he invented it for the US, i cant remmeber his name though.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

people are really going too much pro-kerry.. sure he'll probably be better than bush.. but I think we really have lowered our expectations of US presidents a little too low.

sceptre

Mordeth wrote:

but I think we really have lowered our expectations of US presidents a little too low.

After electing Reagan, Nixon and William Henry Harrison (the plonker who was too hard to wear a jacket to his inaugural address and died from pneumonia as a result)? Or Daddy Bush?

Victor

Remind me how many Electoral College Votes that Antarctica has

Antarctica 136:191

chewy

Niger George W. Bush by 53%

Iraq Statistically even.

Pitcairn Statistically even.????

again this site about the numerous other candidates! ( or as i read the faq hasn;t got round to adding them to the ballot yet...) how ironic

sceptre

chewy wrote:

Pitcairn Statistically even.????

Ah, all presumably using either Pitcairn's only phone line (they've 17 houses connected to a party line IIRC) or that shiny new satellite dish they put in a few months ago, all viewing this site.

Here are all the current residents of Pitcairn by the way. All of them. Less than 68. Unless those "Many Government Officials from New Zealand and the UK in various roles" are in fact still there (they're presumably there for Steve Christian's rape (underage kids btw) trial, ended last week).

PH01

sceptre wrote:

Here are all the current residents of Pitcairn by the way. All of them. Less than 68.

44 for Bush.
33 for Kerry.
That's 77 in total.
Hey! That's 9 more than the total population of the island. Hey, somebody voted twice here! Fraud I cry! Bet it's those darn Republicans again up to their old tricks.

bonkey

magick wrote:

im guessing the world/reality wants Kerry in , but it looks doubtful thank you very much Electoral College system

I'm amazed how often the Electoral College system is "blamed" for as-close-to-half-as-be-damned of the US voting popoulation selecting Bush...I can't figure that out myself. I coulda sworn its the voters - and not the system - which actually make the difference.

And as has been pointed out...this time round, Kerry could win the Electoral College vote and lose the popular vote. Will you be inisting that its still flawed and that Bush should be given another 4 years in that case, or is it just a problem when the "wrong" person gets the break from it?

jc

Hobbes

Sorry but the voters don't make the difference. Try telling it otherwise to a Republican voter in Massachusetts

Villain

Ireland John Kerry by 89%
United Kingdom John Kerry by 81%

All Countries: Bush 53246 Kerry: 408358

Numbers seem very high!

Victor

bonkey wrote:

I'm amazed how often the Electoral College system is "blamed" for as-close-to-half-as-be-damned of the US voting popoulation selecting Bush...I can't figure that out myself. I coulda sworn its the voters - and not the system - which actually make the difference.

Voting systems and polls do colour how people vote. Make a voting system more favourable to the incumbent and people will rail against the system.

Memnoch

bonkey wrote:

I'm amazed how often the Electoral College system is "blamed" for as-close-to-half-as-be-damned of the US voting popoulation selecting Bush...I can't figure that out myself. I coulda sworn its the voters - and not the system - which actually make the difference.

And as has been pointed out...this time round, Kerry could win the Electoral College vote and lose the popular vote. Will you be inisting that its still flawed and that Bush should be given another 4 years in that case, or is it just a problem when the "wrong" person gets the break from it?

jc

in bush's case it was the supreme court that handed him the victory and not really the electoral college, unless we want to ignore the thousands of disenfranchised black voters in florida

Nuttzz

tv3 had a poll today, would you like to see GWB re-elected, 52% said yes.

mike65

Nuttzz wrote:

tv3 had a poll today, would you like to see GWB re-elected, 52% said yes.

That low?!

Mike.

elivsvonchiaing

Ireland now 94% was 95% now Croatia beat us by 2%. No country has a Bush majority. I experimentally tried to vote for Kerry as a Bermudian (well I used to live there ) and vote twice in Ireland - both attempts failed. Can't be arsed to disconnect in the hope I get new IP address... So this is at least semi-kosher!

Victor

elivsvonchiaing wrote:

Ireland now 94% was 95% now Croatia beat us by 2%. No country has a Bush majority. I experimentally tried to vote for Kerry as a Bermudian (well I used to live there ) and vote twice in Ireland - both attempts failed. Can't be arsed to disconnect in the hope I get new IP address... So this is at least semi-kosher!

It probably logs your IP, but doesn't actually check where your IP is.

SkepticOne

Ultimately it will be down to the ordinary men and women of the US Supreme Court to decide who will be president.

jmcc

Nuttzz wrote:

tv3 had a poll today, would you like to see GWB re-elected, 52% said yes.

Wow. How did the single TV3 viewer who voted manage to vote twice?

Regards...jmcc

bonkey

Memnoch wrote:

in bush's case it was the supreme court that handed him the victory and not really the electoral college, unless we want to ignore the thousands of disenfranchised black voters in florida

Yes, thats a nice convenient argument, but, see.....there's absolutely no reason to believe that a different political system would have produced a better result.

The level of error in the elections in 2000 was greater than the margin by which either the electoral or popular vote was carried. So while it may be a nice little comfort-blanket to those who want to think that Bush's first term of office was somehow unjustified, the truth of the matter was that no system would have produced a reliable result for either candidate from the mess of voting in 2000.

Thats my point. You can blame the electoral college all you like, but what caused havoc in 2000 was ultimately the fact that the two-party-split fell inside the error of margin in US voting.

Rather than bitch about the electoral college, there are far more important flaws in teh US system which nede to be fixed. Here's a handful :

1) The mailing of ballots in some states so close to election day that if they get lost in the post, there isn't realistic time to re-send them
2) The notification of voters who have registered that their registration was incomplete or somehow in error occurring after the deadline for registration / corrections has passed.
3) The atriocious systems of voting used in some areas, up to and including the "latest and greatest" expensive toys which offer no greater assurances.
4) The ridiculous election laws in some states, such as that in Florida which limits the maximum number of counties a recount can be sought in - regardless of whether or not there is a case for a state-wide recount.

If the actual voting in the US was sorted out, there'd be far far less complaints about the electoral college. To be honest.....its not that bad a system. After all, how many here are in favour of "one vote per person" in the EU, rather than a weighted-per-nation system which ensures that even minnows like ourselves get some say. Yes, I'm aware that the US is one (very big) nation, and the EU isn't, but I find it amazing that so many people will insist that "one man, one vote" is the only system that should be used anywhere.....except when its to their own disadvantage.

jc

Memnoch

bonkey wrote:

Yes, thats a nice convenient argument, but, see.....there's absolutely no reason to believe that a different political system would have produced a better result.

The level of error in the elections in 2000 was greater than the margin by which either the electoral or popular vote was carried. So while it may be a nice little comfort-blanket to those who want to think that Bush's first term of office was somehow unjustified, the truth of the matter was that no system would have produced a reliable result for either candidate from the mess of voting in 2000.

Thats my point. You can blame the electoral college all you like, but what caused havoc in 2000 was ultimately the fact that the two-party-split fell inside the error of margin in US voting.

Rather than bitch about the electoral college, there are far more important flaws in teh US system which nede to be fixed. Here's a handful :

1) The mailing of ballots in some states so close to election day that if they get lost in the post, there isn't realistic time to re-send them
2) The notification of voters who have registered that their registration was incomplete or somehow in error occurring after the deadline for registration / corrections has passed.
3) The atriocious systems of voting used in some areas, up to and including the "latest and greatest" expensive toys which offer no greater assurances.
4) The ridiculous election laws in some states, such as that in Florida which limits the maximum number of counties a recount can be sought in - regardless of whether or not there is a case for a state-wide recount.

If the actual voting in the US was sorted out, there'd be far far less complaints about the electoral college. To be honest.....its not that bad a system. After all, how many here are in favour of "one vote per person" in the EU, rather than a weighted-per-nation system which ensures that even minnows like ourselves get some say. Yes, I'm aware that the US is one (very big) nation, and the EU isn't, but I find it amazing that so many people will insist that "one man, one vote" is the only system that should be used anywhere.....except when its to their own disadvantage.

jc

when did I say I have a problem with the electoral college? I must have missed that bit...

no my problem is quite specificially with black voters being illegally struck of the record books by Bush's friends in a state with Bush's cousin as governor if the state.

Statistical margins and other "errors aside" the fact remains that at the end Bush only had florida by like 600 votes, which remain "contested" and thats AFTER what 90k+ were disenfranchised of their right to vote?

as far as I'm concerned bush lost both the electoral AND the popular vote, but was appointed by the republican leaning supreme court.

bonkey

My apologies...I thought you were following the thought I was originally coming from, which was wondering why its the electoral system which is blamed, when the real problems come from an area which would effect any democratic system...

Statistical margins and other "errors aside" the fact remains that at the end Bush only had florida by like 600 votes, which remain "contested" and thats AFTER what 90k+ were disenfranchised of their right to vote?

But those 90+k were part of the "errors" that you're initially saying to set aside! And while we can come back and say that these votes should have been provisionally allowed to be cast, with a ruling to follow as to their eligibility (or some other such condition), or should never have been removed in the first place these are exactly the problems I'm saying are to blame, and not the electoral college system.

Bush won the election as US election law stands. You can say he shouldn't have all you like (and I may agree), but the point I was making is that he didn't win the election "thanks to the electoral college system", but rather "thanks to the flaws in the system which allow mistakes and corruption to have undue effect".

jc

Victor

bonkey wrote:

1) The mailing of ballots in some states so close to election day that if they get lost in the post, there isn't realistic time to re-send them

Paying adequate postage is also helpful.

NotMe

elivsvonchiaing wrote:

Ireland now 94% was 95% now Croatia beat us by 2%. No country has a Bush majority. I experimentally tried to vote for Kerry as a Bermudian (well I used to live there ) and vote twice in Ireland - both attempts failed. Can't be arsed to disconnect in the hope I get new IP address... So this is at least semi-kosher!

Well I gave Kerry a vote from Pitcairn so that's how accurate it is.

elivsvonchiaing

NotMe wrote:

Well I gave Kerry a vote from Pitcairn so that's how accurate it is.

'Course you do realise your modem has been hi-jacked and your IP address is PitCairn. Your vote cost a mere €4

NotMe

elivsvonchiaing wrote:

'Course you do realise your modem has been hi-jacked and your IP address is PitCairn. Your vote cost a mere ?4

:eek: Damn those Pitcairnian hijackers. Looks like they got a few other people aswell...