Re: The Electoral "College" and combinatorics
From: Bart Goddard (goddardbe_at_netscape.net)
Date: 08/02/04
- Next message: David C. Ullrich: "Re: Extending a function"
- Previous message: Dr. Jai Maharaj: "Re: BHARAT'S (INDIA'S) CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE WORLD"
- In reply to: David C. Ullrich: "Re: The Electoral "College" and combinatorics"
- Next in thread: David C. Ullrich: "Re: The Electoral "College" and combinatorics"
- Reply: David C. Ullrich: "Re: The Electoral "College" and combinatorics"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 2 Aug 2004 19:58:45 GMT
David C. Ullrich wrote:
>>A candidate can _legally_ buy an election of the
>>popular vote, by advertizing. He can buy an elector
>>only illegally.
>
> really? what federal statute makes it illegal to try
> to influence an elector's vote? and how do they enforce
> it? seems like they have to prevent electors from
> watching tv or reading the paper - i didn't realize
> they did that.
You were the one who was asking which was cheaper and talked
about corruption, (not influence.) I sure don't know what
the federal statute is, but I'd bet good money that there
is one that makes it a serious offense to bribe or coerce an
elector.
> ignoring the question of whether the way things -seem-
> to -you- has any place in an argument that iirc started
> with a discussion of whether something is 'logical':
> what evidence do you have that the typical elector
> arrives at his opinions for less idiotic reasons than
> the general public?
Let's not quite ignore the question. The OP said "What
possible reason" could there be for keeping the EC? in a
rhetorical sense, meaning that she believed firmly that
there could be no sensible reason. To gainsay her, I
don't have to prove that the EC is the best or even in
the top ten. All I have to do is present a reasonable
argument that there might well be advantages to the EC,
which makes her "argument by rhetorical question" pretty
ineffective.
To your question, the elector doesn't vote "his opinions"
in the same sense that a voter does. An elector is
_supposed_ to vote as directed, and in some states, it
appears, he is bound. And, lo, almost everytime, the
electors vote they way they are directed.
Bart
- Next message: David C. Ullrich: "Re: Extending a function"
- Previous message: Dr. Jai Maharaj: "Re: BHARAT'S (INDIA'S) CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE WORLD"
- In reply to: David C. Ullrich: "Re: The Electoral "College" and combinatorics"
- Next in thread: David C. Ullrich: "Re: The Electoral "College" and combinatorics"
- Reply: David C. Ullrich: "Re: The Electoral "College" and combinatorics"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|