Right now the voting system has a number of ins and outs that are not general knowledge (though public schools are *supposed* to cover this), there is something called the electoral college. The way it works is this, all the votes from a state are tallied up and that *should* indicate to the senators from that state which way to vote in the electoral college.
It is in fact the electoral college that elects a president, not the population. Even though the popular vote from the state should dictate the states vote in the electoral college, the senators are not obligated to vote for the canidate that has the popular vote in their state. Nor is it publicized which way the senator voted in the elecotral college.
This accounts for presidents that are elected without the popular vote, senators will vote for their friends regardless of how their state voted.
Originally the purpose of the electoral college was to facilitate an easier tally, with the understanding that the senator would vote as dictated in the popular vote, in order to retain the favor of the population in their respective states.
But the combination of lack of publicity and lack of information about popular voting and the electoral college makes it hard to understand what is really going on in the voting process.
With the advent of the technology age, all of this became outdated, tallying the votes is no longer time consuming. Votes could merely be automatically entered and tabulated, providing fast and accurate results, even for the whole nation. So in effect that little box has made the electoral college obsolete, and the electoral college stays in place inspite of this.
The internet also makes it possible to bypass the tedium of having to find the voting stations that invariably seem to be located in some tiny elementary school in the middle of nowhere. So potentially more could vote with less hassle and more accuracy, and without the electoral college.
While many claim that those without access to the technology would be left out are overlooking a few major points.
Access to the internet and technolgy is pretty
available at this point, and right in the same areas where the traditional voting takes place : schools.
Most public schools and college have computers and internet access, as do public libaries. It doesn't seem to be discrimatory to simply move the official voting stations to these places, replace the pull knobs in the voting booths to point and click.
Heck you could even make inforamtion on the canidates available at the same site, either on a website or pamphets to read while waiting in line, rather than hordes of people screaming a name at you on your way in.
Imagine a simple an easy way to promote informed voting with the choice of onsite and remote voting, while making the popular vote the one that elects the leaders rather than their buddies on capital hill. For this reason alone, expect the outcries of discriminaton and objections from politicos to keep this on the back burner for as long as they can manage (and also notice who it is claiming that using technology to revamp the voting system is discrimitory--they look like politicians to me).
But for me, i can't wait for technology to make my vote become more than to a mere sugestion to a politician.
Slashdot Mirror
i did, they were there in the preview, aren't bugs great :)
Right now the voting system has a number of ins and outs that are not general knowledge (though public schools are *supposed* to cover this), there is something called the electoral college. The way it works is this, all the votes from a state are tallied up and that *should* indicate to the senators from that state which way to vote in the electoral college. It is in fact the electoral college that elects a president, not the population. Even though the popular vote from the state should dictate the states vote in the electoral college, the senators are not obligated to vote for the canidate that has the popular vote in their state. Nor is it publicized which way the senator voted in the elecotral college. This accounts for presidents that are elected without the popular vote, senators will vote for their friends regardless of how their state voted. Originally the purpose of the electoral college was to facilitate an easier tally, with the understanding that the senator would vote as dictated in the popular vote, in order to retain the favor of the population in their respective states. But the combination of lack of publicity and lack of information about popular voting and the electoral college makes it hard to understand what is really going on in the voting process. With the advent of the technology age, all of this became outdated, tallying the votes is no longer time consuming. Votes could merely be automatically entered and tabulated, providing fast and accurate results, even for the whole nation. So in effect that little box has made the electoral college obsolete, and the electoral college stays in place inspite of this. The internet also makes it possible to bypass the tedium of having to find the voting stations that invariably seem to be located in some tiny elementary school in the middle of nowhere. So potentially more could vote with less hassle and more accuracy, and without the electoral college. While many claim that those without access to the technology would be left out are overlooking a few major points. Access to the internet and technolgy is pretty available at this point, and right in the same areas where the traditional voting takes place : schools. Most public schools and college have computers and internet access, as do public libaries. It doesn't seem to be discrimatory to simply move the official voting stations to these places, replace the pull knobs in the voting booths to point and click. Heck you could even make inforamtion on the canidates available at the same site, either on a website or pamphets to read while waiting in line, rather than hordes of people screaming a name at you on your way in. Imagine a simple an easy way to promote informed voting with the choice of onsite and remote voting, while making the popular vote the one that elects the leaders rather than their buddies on capital hill. For this reason alone, expect the outcries of discriminaton and objections from politicos to keep this on the back burner for as long as they can manage (and also notice who it is claiming that using technology to revamp the voting system is discrimitory--they look like politicians to me). But for me, i can't wait for technology to make my vote become more than to a mere sugestion to a politician.
But disturbingly you look identical to my boyfriend.