Better Democracy: China or US? (3)

Pursuant to our article of last week, we have published yesterday comments from England and Canada. Today's comments: from United States

- First order of business for the 111th Congress By John Patterson

" tear down the electoral college and replace it with the popular vote...If ever the opportunity will exist, it willbe in the first months of the next Congress, after the people have been put through another Electoral Colelge constitutional crisis.

Because, if all the polls are correct, we are mocing headlong into another debacle, where the will of the people is trumped by the pernicious powers of corporate influence.They've bought and paid for our candidates' campaigns now for a long time, and they will demand payback.

Bush v Gore was just the beginning, if we do not eliminate the electoral college, we will never realize the fully evolved Democracy our founders hinted at when they formed this great nation.Democracy is evolving.And the demise of the electoral college and its replacement by the popular vote, will represent one of the most notable and historic hallmarks in that evolution.

Reply By Arius
While we're at it, get rid of the Senate for the same reasons.

- By Arius
At least here the Supreme Court had a choice between a Republican and a Democrat, not a Republican and a Republican.

Reply By Foreign Affairs Consultant
Perhaps, a third party will be an answer.

- By Oklahoma Voter (chang@cableone.net)

"Optical scanning devices with paper ballot are the best way to go. Oklahoma has been using optical scanners since 1992. Historical voting irregularity scandals are what caused Oklahoma to convert to optical scanners years ago.
This is an election, not an auction. A primary, not a slam dunk by media, lobbyists, and Washington insiders.

Addendum:

China is a fascist oligarchy not a democracy. Read the book "Confessions: An Innocent Life in Communist China" by Kang Zhengguo, if you have any illusions.
by OklahomaVoter (chang@cableone.net)

- Reply by The Facilitator

"An extremely limited choice. In theory, you are right.

My point is this: The Communist Party has a choice among 2,200 delegates. Here, only 5 or 6 candidates, who can raise $100 million, have a chance to lead their respective party. So, 200 million people choosing between two candidates already financed by pressure groups, lobbyists, etc.

If none of them is qualified, we still have the freedom to chose the lest incompetent.

- Reply by adbct 16 (gop4ire@att.net,gop4jre

"China imprisons those who it considers to be threat to its authority.....human rights are anm after thought.....elections are decided by the elite not by ordinary citizens....to compare China to the US is absurd......and one last note....the supreme court did not decide the 2000 election....it determined that guessing at the intent of a voter based upon a perforated ballot or hanging chad was not a sufficient or reliable measure to count a vote.

They determined that to do so would be to ignore the votes of millions in favor of a some thousands based upon guessing and conjecture......they were correct. The outcome may not have been desirable, but the decision was correct. Get over it....."

- Reply by The Facilitator

"How about counting all the votes. Did they stop the counting of votes...yes or no?Did we imprison journalists, yes or no. Are we listening to private communications, yes or no?China has an elite, and we have the lobbyists, pressure groups, as elite...and they decide.

Still did not answer my point: 2,200 who can make a difference in China....here, we are limited to 5 or 6 who can raise $100 million. Yes or no? That's the question. It is absurd to keep your head in the sand. Get over it...there is a world moving forward, outside our borders."

- Reply by adbct16

"Did they stp counting votes yes? Why because they could not determien a proper or valid way to count hanging chads and dimpled chads.....which is what the Supreme Court stated was the problem. You cannot accurately determine the intent of a vote based upon such methods......it was absurd.....do we imprison journalists in this country, perhaps if they defy court ordered testimony. Do we put them in gulags and the like for life...uh no....
As for being limited to 5 or 6 or can raise $100 million...whose fault is that...you mean voters dont see the candidates....they dont realize what a fraud hillary is cmon.....get your head out of the sand...

- by carl cimini (carlcimini@yahoo.com, Wobbdlimind Media)

"China has a plan. We continue to follow the plan of madness. Totalitarian China? At this point the lofty goal and dream of an egalitarian society presented by Mao seems to be working.
I remember working in China during the first bush gore election, the look of my Chinese friends was akin to my puppy when it tilts its head, and a question would follow...Do you believe the masquerade? I would respond "It hasn't always been a criminal country; the U.S. for many years was the land of the underdog". The good fight was worth fighting. Today, the dream has died. Let's hope the Dems can revive it. "

The Facilitator