If you read a bit further to where he said "I would never want it in my pocket" you would understand maybe. I use my phone for a phone and if I can't carry it around comfortably in my pocket I don't want it.
Well bacteria don't exactly get to choose their hosts. They have to make the most of their circumstances and if that means infecting a sea sponge then so be it.
Wrong, I'm opposed to EC because it's a bad system. I voted for Obama last election and he won the EC. I don't expect the change would give candidates I support an advantage.
It is not a fallacy at all. The Federalist Papers make it quite clear that the founding fathers did not trust the common people to vote for the President. There was good reason for that at the time since people were not bombarded 24x7 with information about their candidates as we are now.
Why is the foolish "I can't do what I like with my child" comment rated at 5 while none of the good responses to it, including your comment, have been rated up?
Come on mods! You can't all be libertarian nuts today, can you?
Unfortunately it's not only those who choose not to be vaccinated which are effected. Vaccines aren't perfect and people who have been immunized can still get sick if they are exposed to an outbreak from those who haven't been immunized. They are likely to develop a milder illness if they do get ill, but they aren't entirely safe from these dangerous diseases. The anti-vaccine people are doing everyone a grave disservice, not just their family.
If people do complain because their token electors go to someone who their state didn't vote for they need to grow up. The election doesn't always go for the person my one vote went for but I don't think that's unfair because I realize the election isn't just about me. Likewise I think people will realize that with the popular vote the election isn't just about their state.
And the most interesting thing about the Bush-Gore election is that if Gore had lost the popular vote and won the election, the howling would have been just as loud.
That's not terribly interesting, in fact it's pretty obvious. The only reason people don't usually complain about the electoral system is that it usually agrees with the popular vote.
Firstly, the President is elected by the states, not the people. If you want to change that--and I'm not saying that we shouldn't--we need a Constitutional amendment, not this.... If a state wanted to assign its electors based on a coin toss, it could.
So the states can choose anyway to assign its electors, except for this? This law does not get rid of the electoral system, it's just a way for the states to choose their electors based on the national popular vote. They have every right to do this.
Secondly, the Electoral College prevents messy, nation-wide recounts. Think about the 2000 election mess. Now, imagine the entire country having to recount, not just Florida.
If we just went by national popular vote the 2000 election would have been less of a mess, not more. The day after the election we would have already known Gore was president.
Lastly, the EC has proven itself robust over the last 200+ years. I'm not saying it's perfect, not by a long shot. But I give the benefit of the doubt to an institution which has helped facilitate more peaceful transitions of power, than any other system in history.
See answer one above about this plan not getting rid of the EC. Even if it did though I would support it, I don't think the EC has anything at all to do with the relative peacefulness of American politics.
Nice strawman there. What part of what he said is wrong? Read the Federalist Papers where the argument he states is made. That electors were intended to protect the voters from themselves.
You, and most supporters of the EC, are confusing how the EC was originally intended to work with how it actually works. Originally you would be voting for an elector and the elector would vote for who they though was the most appropriate candidate, regardless of how the people voted. That was then.
Now all states have laws that say the the electors must vote based on the outcome of the election. The whole original point of EC is irrelevant now and so what we have is basically just a broken popular vote where citizens of different states count differently.
I'm not actually in favor of this, simply because it takes away the say of the people in Iowa. If their state votes for the loser, so be it, they should be counted.
That doesn't make sense. With the national popular vote system everyone's vote is counted and they are all counted equally. That includes people from Iowa.
Slashdot Mirror
Also same problem with lousy flash plugin crashing your browser, same problem with big, slow Acrobat plugin freezing your browser for 30 seconds.
Appearance is the least of the selling points for Chrome.
Or do "set -o inc_append_history" in zsh.
(I'm not sure if the option is case sensitive. It may need to be in CAPS, the lameness filter made me change it)
True for now, but if electric cars ever catch on than you will start seeing another large peak at night when they are charging.
Doing it cheaply and without having a large ugly array mounted to the roof would be the hard part, especially if they want to use this on homes.
To cool it off maybe you could combine a solar electric system with a solar heating system and pass the cold water under the cells.
Violence as your primary means of problem solving, that is very American of you.
His crime of trespassing in no way justifies your crime of assault.
Correction, this is not the true tao.
If you read a bit further to where he said "I would never want it in my pocket" you would understand maybe. I use my phone for a phone and if I can't carry it around comfortably in my pocket I don't want it.
They would beg to differ, except they can't beg since they aren't self-aware. I'll take my not so prolific yet sentient existence any day.
Well bacteria don't exactly get to choose their hosts. They have to make the most of their circumstances and if that means infecting a sea sponge then so be it.
Have you ever listened to talk radio? It's not the idiots who have trouble getting listeners.
For the record, Feinstein is not considered a "Liberal Democrat" by anyone.
Wrong, I'm opposed to EC because it's a bad system. I voted for Obama last election and he won the EC. I don't expect the change would give candidates I support an advantage.
It is not a fallacy at all. The Federalist Papers make it quite clear that the founding fathers did not trust the common people to vote for the President. There was good reason for that at the time since people were not bombarded 24x7 with information about their candidates as we are now.
Why is the foolish "I can't do what I like with my child" comment rated at 5 while none of the good responses to it, including your comment, have been rated up?
Come on mods! You can't all be libertarian nuts today, can you?
Unfortunately it's not only those who choose not to be vaccinated which are effected. Vaccines aren't perfect and people who have been immunized can still get sick if they are exposed to an outbreak from those who haven't been immunized. They are likely to develop a milder illness if they do get ill, but they aren't entirely safe from these dangerous diseases. The anti-vaccine people are doing everyone a grave disservice, not just their family.
If people do complain because their token electors go to someone who their state didn't vote for they need to grow up. The election doesn't always go for the person my one vote went for but I don't think that's unfair because I realize the election isn't just about me. Likewise I think people will realize that with the popular vote the election isn't just about their state.
That's not terribly interesting, in fact it's pretty obvious. The only reason people don't usually complain about the electoral system is that it usually agrees with the popular vote.
So the states can choose anyway to assign its electors, except for this? This law does not get rid of the electoral system, it's just a way for the states to choose their electors based on the national popular vote. They have every right to do this.
If we just went by national popular vote the 2000 election would have been less of a mess, not more. The day after the election we would have already known Gore was president.
See answer one above about this plan not getting rid of the EC. Even if it did though I would support it, I don't think the EC has anything at all to do with the relative peacefulness of American politics.
I'm trying to imagine why the election going to the person who got the most votes would elicit howls or laughter.
OTOH, if you really want to see people pissed about an elections outcome, see Bush v. Gore.
Nice strawman there. What part of what he said is wrong? Read the Federalist Papers where the argument he states is made. That electors were intended to protect the voters from themselves.
You, and most supporters of the EC, are confusing how the EC was originally intended to work with how it actually works. Originally you would be voting for an elector and the elector would vote for who they though was the most appropriate candidate, regardless of how the people voted. That was then.
Now all states have laws that say the the electors must vote based on the outcome of the election. The whole original point of EC is irrelevant now and so what we have is basically just a broken popular vote where citizens of different states count differently.
That doesn't make sense. With the national popular vote system everyone's vote is counted and they are all counted equally. That includes people from Iowa.
First thing I think of is all the people who voted for Bush's second term. You don't get more ignorant then that.
That is a much better, thanks :)
From what I remember BeOS wasn't designed as a multi-user system. What sort of security protections does it have?