Did you read anything beyond that? The original design doesn't apply anymore. It's no longer relevant, hence you are wrong in saying it is still any part of why we have the electoral system today.
So the 20% of the population in the swing states gets absolute control over the presidential election. How is that not worse than the majority having control?
You're entirely wrong. The original design was that the people wouldn't vote for the president, but we do now. The people vote for who their electors vote for. That maybe wasn't how the founders intended for it to work, but they allowed the states to choose how to allocate their electoral votes and all of them have chosen to leave it up to their voters.
What the electoral system was meant to do has nothing to do with what it currently does. Electors were not meant to be bound to the popular votes of the states, as they now are. The original purpose for the electoral system no longer exists, and yet we are stuck with this backwards, broken system.
You say the electoral college is not the problem, but what you describe is exactly why it's a problem. Allocating electoral votes by district is only marginally better than allocating them by state. It's still the same thing. Anything other than allocating votes per voter is plain wrong.
The electoral system causes presidential candidates to entirely ignore EIGHTY PERCENT of the population. Does that sound right to you? I think it is perfectly reasonable for a candidate to spend a lot of time in California, Texas, New York, and Florida. Because that's where most of the constituents are.
Why is vote count delay even an issue? I know the 24 hour median wants results in prime time, but who cares about that? The president isn't sworn in until late January, let the counters take as long as is needed to do it right.
That's exactly how they work fine in large parts of the US too. Voting is a solved problem, and yet people still insist on innovating which always causes more problems than it solves.
The original intent of the system is that the voters won't be voting, but my point is that that's not the case anymore. You can call it whatever you like, but in effect it has degraded to nothing but a broken popular vote. There is no point to it anymore.
Did you read anything I wrote? The electors don't get to choose who they are voting for anymore. It is all still chosen by the popular votes of the states.
Do you know that the system the founding fathers put in place to defend us from demagoguery no longer exists? Originally electors were free to vote for anyone, but as time passed state laws began to require them to cast their votes based on the outcome of the states election. Because of this, the electoral system now is basically just a different way of counting the popular vote. Different, in that it arbitrarily gives more weight to the small number of voters from small states resulting in candidates entirely ignoring the vast majority of the population during an election.
There is no reason for the electoral systems anymore. It is a ridiculous and unfair system that should have been tossed decades ago.
That's because the Republican's don't waste their time with voter fraud, they know voter suppression is where's it's at. Robocalls giving wrong information, voter ID laws, cutting precinct locations and early voting hours. Those are how you steal an election and this is what the Republicans shamelessly do time and time again.
Good morning Mr. van Winkle. Since you slept through the entire previous administration you might want to do some reading on our 43rd President. We made it through 8 years of his administration without even 1 full blown depression. Rest easy that if we survived that, we will survive another 4 years of Obama.
It doesn't matter who, but it does matter what algorithm they're using. Monitors aren't guaranteed to be using the algorithm that produces the best results.
Slashdot Mirror
It looks better and uses space more efficiently. Why is it not better?
Such sound reasoning you got there. Clearly the random /. mods know something that the government doesn't want let out.
Did you read anything beyond that? The original design doesn't apply anymore. It's no longer relevant, hence you are wrong in saying it is still any part of why we have the electoral system today.
So the 20% of the population in the swing states gets absolute control over the presidential election. How is that not worse than the majority having control?
Have you ever cast a ballot to vote on a federal law? Have you ever cast a ballot to vote for the president? See the difference?
You're entirely wrong. The original design was that the people wouldn't vote for the president, but we do now. The people vote for who their electors vote for. That maybe wasn't how the founders intended for it to work, but they allowed the states to choose how to allocate their electoral votes and all of them have chosen to leave it up to their voters.
What the electoral system was meant to do has nothing to do with what it currently does. Electors were not meant to be bound to the popular votes of the states, as they now are. The original purpose for the electoral system no longer exists, and yet we are stuck with this backwards, broken system.
You say the electoral college is not the problem, but what you describe is exactly why it's a problem. Allocating electoral votes by district is only marginally better than allocating them by state. It's still the same thing. Anything other than allocating votes per voter is plain wrong.
The electoral system causes presidential candidates to entirely ignore EIGHTY PERCENT of the population. Does that sound right to you? I think it is perfectly reasonable for a candidate to spend a lot of time in California, Texas, New York, and Florida. Because that's where most of the constituents are.
These are the exact reasons why we shouldn't have voting machines at all. They are an unnecessary, unreliable expense.
Why is vote count delay even an issue? I know the 24 hour median wants results in prime time, but who cares about that? The president isn't sworn in until late January, let the counters take as long as is needed to do it right.
That's exactly how they work fine in large parts of the US too. Voting is a solved problem, and yet people still insist on innovating which always causes more problems than it solves.
The original intent of the system is that the voters won't be voting, but my point is that that's not the case anymore. You can call it whatever you like, but in effect it has degraded to nothing but a broken popular vote. There is no point to it anymore.
Did you read anything I wrote? The electors don't get to choose who they are voting for anymore. It is all still chosen by the popular votes of the states.
What's the big deal? Recounts are done at the state level anyway. If one state can do a recount, 50 states can do a recount.
Do you know that the system the founding fathers put in place to defend us from demagoguery no longer exists? Originally electors were free to vote for anyone, but as time passed state laws began to require them to cast their votes based on the outcome of the states election. Because of this, the electoral system now is basically just a different way of counting the popular vote. Different, in that it arbitrarily gives more weight to the small number of voters from small states resulting in candidates entirely ignoring the vast majority of the population during an election.
There is no reason for the electoral systems anymore. It is a ridiculous and unfair system that should have been tossed decades ago.
That's because the Republican's don't waste their time with voter fraud, they know voter suppression is where's it's at. Robocalls giving wrong information, voter ID laws, cutting precinct locations and early voting hours. Those are how you steal an election and this is what the Republicans shamelessly do time and time again.
Good morning Mr. van Winkle. Since you slept through the entire previous administration you might want to do some reading on our 43rd President. We made it through 8 years of his administration without even 1 full blown depression. Rest easy that if we survived that, we will survive another 4 years of Obama.
How exactly are latency and IOPS not measures of speed?
According to this page it looks like they're still doing it.
Only 8GB and 16GB available:
https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=nexus_4_16gb&feature=device-featured
8GB is a joke, I don't get it.
T-Mobile does, unless that changed recently. I still have the cheaper non-subsidised plan.
Linux users use laptops too. Good luck finding a laptop that doesn't have Windows installed on it.
It doesn't matter who, but it does matter what algorithm they're using. Monitors aren't guaranteed to be using the algorithm that produces the best results.
At that temperature the scale is fairly irrelevant. It's less than an order of magnitude difference either way.