Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< It's not any more complicated than that. In this day and age, I'm at an absolute loss as to why we don't have 1) a National Elections Board that oversees all national races and establishes laws and guidelines for local races; 2) the elimination of the electoral college. >>> I hear what you're saying. My comment (suggestion?) purposely avoided discussion of any of the above issues. Implementing a voting system (by which I mean the actual, physical means of casting and counting the ballots) that puts an end once and for all to all of the ambiguities and other problems we continue to have with close elections is very doable. In fact, "proper" voting systems as I've described them are actually in place in several jurisdictions. Implementing them elsewhere is just a matter of education and getting everyone to understand what the issues are and that the solutions are already here. Doing this does not require removing local control, getting rid of the electoral college, or any widesweeping reform. <<< But people don't want to relinquish their local control. >>> That's certainly one issue. <<< And how criminal is it that companies like Diebold that make these machines donate money to one political party? >>> ... and in that particular case, where the company president was quoted as being "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president [in 2004]"
