>   
      
   BK>>  Under the electoral college system the people who live in the   
   BK>> hinterlands have a lesser voice. Look at the number of states   
   BK>> Romney won, compared to the number of states Obama won. Romney  won   
   BK>> more states, Obama won more people.   
      
   BK>>  In 2000 Bush won the electoral college, but Gore won the   
   BK>>  people's votes. IOW, Bush won the trees and bushes and rivers  and   
   BK>> deserts, Gore won the people.   
      
    RW> I've argued this one for years.  This would also benefit   
    RW> third party candidates, as those who voted for them would   
    RW> actually find their votes counted as more than just a vote   
    RW> against tweedle dumb or tweedle dumber.   
      
    True. Esp if the third party candidate was running well   
    elsewhere, but not in your state. Now, if he doesn't get the   
    majority in your state it don't count. With a direct vote they   
    all add up.   
      
   BK>>  With the electoral college the candidates have no reason to even   
   BK>> visit a state or area he feels he has no chance in. Without it  all   
   BK>> votes count the same.   
      
    RW> There's that too.  IT might push candidates to actually   
    RW> talk issues with these folks.   
      
    Now you are asking way too much...   
      
   BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn   
      
   ... Flashback? Must be a new attachment for an M-16   
   --- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]   
    * Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 And Still Here. Join Us: www.DocsPl (1:123/140)