Replying to a message of Jeff Snyder to Bob Ackley:

 JS> Personally, I have been of the opinion for some time that maybe the
 JS> USA would be better off without the electoral college. Maybe we
 JS> should go back to just a popular vote, and one-man, one-vote. That
 JS> way, people's voices have a better chance of being heard...maybe.

On that we disagree.  Despite the verbiage in the Constitution ("We
the People...")
the national government was formed by the *states*.  The Constitution was written
by representatives of the *states* and was ratified by the *states*.  Any amendments
must be ratified by the *states* (note that I didn't say 'changes').

President and veep are the only two national elected offices (congresscrooks are
representatives *to* the national government elected by the people of the states they
represent) and they are elected by the *states*, not by the people.

The problem with direct election (of anybody) is that five different people can count
the same set of ballots and get five different sets of numbers.  That was
demonstrated
in Florida during the election of 2000.  This is true even if the elections
are honest
(something I no longer believe), and the fact that paperless, unauditable
electronic voting
is being pushed onto the population will make it much easier to 'adjust'
the outcome of
any election.

IMO one of the biggest mistakes made in this country was the direct election of
senators back in the early 1900s.  Prior to that senators were selected by
the various
state governments (usually the state legislature) to reporesent the *state*, not the
people in it.

Cynic?  You betcha, and proud of it.

--- FleetStreet 1.19+