Presidential Vote Certification Faces Objection

Founder · **Thu Jan 06, 2005 8:03 pm**

All I have to say is this: If Kerry had won, all of this debate would not be happening. They keep claiming its because they want to ensure the electoral process is working. BS.

Republican_Man · **Thu Jan 06, 2005 8:04 pm**

Founder · **Thu Jan 06, 2005 8:08 pm**

I was watching C-Span today. They were talking about this topic in the Senate. Democrats kept spouting off about the electoral process. A Republican went up and mentioned that Kerry winning votes from several dead people. Although I heard Bush did the same, but I don't know about that. I think this should just be dropped.

Republican_Man · **Thu Jan 06, 2005 8:12 pm**

Leo Wyatt · **Thu Jan 06, 2005 8:40 pm**

You know people say lets do a recount is whining and can not just accept and move on like adults instead I hear about people still crying about Kerry losing. If he would have won, I would not whining, I would say oh well life goes on. It is no use of crying about and being upset to me.

Just waste of time and energy.

Hitchhiker · **Thu Jan 06, 2005 8:42 pm**

Hey, dead people can vote too! Don't disenfranchise dead people!

I agree that the hype about elections is largely due to the way the media treats it. Both campaigns incur ill will because of their bad tactics (which are what the media like to focus upon).

It's over, Bush won. I accept this and move on (and I'm not even American . . . ) All the votes need to be counted anyway, because that's what votes are there for. But I don't think that at this point in time doing anything to change the result would be good for the U.S. The U.S. needs stability, which means it needs to be united under one leader.

Little Voice Whispers: And without the U.S. stabilized, Canada will not be stabilized. Join the Dark Side, Hitchhiker. Give us your towel.

Link, the Hero of Time · **Thu Jan 06, 2005 11:55 pm**

The 2001 election has already proved that the Electoral college doesn't work.

All this is is a way to get closer on the election anyway. There were to many states that were called for both sides without ALL ballots being counted.

LightningBoy · **Fri Jan 07, 2005 12:00 am**

I walked in to my polling booth, voted, and walked out.

Zero problems.

Come on... Even John Kerry isn't contesting the election.

LightningBoy · **Fri Jan 07, 2005 12:01 am**

Republican_Man · **Fri Jan 07, 2005 12:03 am**

D_Star · Lieutenant Joined: 09 Oct 2004 Posts: 151

D_Star · Lieutenant Joined: 09 Oct 2004 Posts: 151

Jeremy · **Fri Jan 07, 2005 2:34 pm**

I think that there shouldn't be a debate in some ways, as Bush has won. It would be interesting to see the actual votes though. I agree with the Bush supporters that the democrats wouldn't have been asking for this if Kerry won, but I think that Republicans would have been the ones complaining instead. Not that I'm saying it's wrong as such, just that it would happen whoever had won.

Leo Wyatt · **Fri Jan 07, 2005 4:55 pm**

I personally would not complain if Kerry had won and I am a Republican. I am an adult and act like one well I try anyway. I think it is time for the Democrats to grow up and qquit that whining. It is over with Gees. Debating about all this crap is old and boring.

Defiant · **Fri Jan 07, 2005 5:00 pm**

Thats exactly how I feel. If my candidate didnt win, I wouldnt whine about it. Oh wait, thats what happened. Well, im fine with it. So everyone else should be too!

Link, the Hero of Time · **Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:28 pm**

wow, I said 2001..... I need more sleep.

I ment the election in 2000.

As for the electoral college, it worked fine in the past when more people were illiterate and didn't know what they were doing. It has become useless.

Basically, the electoral college is someone you vote in to take your votes into account and vote on the candidate. the 2000 election showed how it no longer follows the views of the people it represents.

It's a useless system that should have died out years ago.

Arellia · **Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:47 pm**

And...allowing candidates to only campaign and benefit highly populated areas is useful? You get California, New York, Texas, a couple other states and you have the election. <And letting California decide on ANYTHING--including senators, is a mistake

> What would you suggest? Straight popular vote? Then you ignore the needs of the people in the middle of the country. It's not a great system, but no one's really come up with a better one considering the size and diversity of the country that I've heard of, or I'd support it.

Link, the Hero of Time · **Sun Jan 09, 2005 1:56 pm**

uhhh... I dont know if you noticed but that's what they do now.

If they do stop in places like Kansas and Iowa, which is unlikely, it's rather quick.

And california was wrong in electing Ah-nold as the Governor?

and really what I was suggesting is that we get rid of the electoral college but keep the electoral votes. Those electoral votes go to the candidate with the most votes.

Republican_Man · **Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:19 pm**