Slashdot Mirror
Mathematicians: Elections Flawed
Nader-licious writes "Science News Online reports: 'With recent reports of malfunctioning voter machines and uncounted votes during primaries in Florida, Maryland, and elsewhere, reformers are once again clamoring for extensive changes. But while attention is focused on these familiar irregularities, a much more serious problem is being neglected: the fundamental flaws of the voting procedure itself. Mathematics are shedding light on questions about how well different voting procedures capture the will of the voters.' The verdict: the U.S. system might be the worst of the lot."
Montana population: 904,000; electors: 3; Voters per elector: 300,000
California population: 34,000,000; electors: 54; Voters per elector: 629000
Since half of California's population is comprised of non-citizens, it works out. Seriously, your assumption/math is flawed. Population is not the same thing as eligible electors.
Amazingly, (please note my facetiousness) Saddam Hussein manage to get 100% of the vote, beating his previous record of over 99%. If the goal is to limit the number of choices, the one choice of Saddam (or be shot) must be ideal.
This is just more sour grapes over people not getting the leaders they want because the majority doesn't like it. I will admit the system isn't perfect, but get over it. We can work to improve the system, but to suggest that it is fundamentally flawed because there are too many choices is pure balogna. Just because not everyone can agree on who the best guy for the job is, doesn't mean the system is flawed. In fact, it means the system is working quite well.
Why are Americans so quick to hate America when our system of government is clearly superior to other forms? (Not perfect, better.) I just don't get it.