# If GWB is re-elected, but... **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 7, 2003, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-gwb-is-re-elected-but/206163 "2003-10-07T21:56:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2003, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-gwb-is-re-elected-but/206163/101 "2003-10-20T20:57:24Z")
One thing the anti-EC crowd seems to ignore is that we’d almost certainly end up with something like the EC if the US were being forged today from 50 autonomous states. This can’t be proven, of course, but just look at what is going on with the EU. As those countries integrate themselves more and more politically, you can bet your bottom Euro that there won’t be a popularly elected head of the EU. ---
**Author:** ![Honesty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f04885/32.png) [@Honesty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Honesty)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2003, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-gwb-is-re-elected-but/206163/102 "2003-10-21T06:43:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Mace \* > \*\*Nice strawman, but I’m not biting. I believe in the right of sovereign states to enter into a larger union on the the terms agreed to by the sovereign states. And I believe in the right of those states **not** to have those terms changed at a later date except by a process agreed to by the states in the first place. And that includes the right of sovereign states to agree to terms that do not support a one-man-one-vote for issues outside the jursidiction of each individual state. \*\* Hmm, lots of things have been abolished and adjusted since the drafting of the Constitution. Nothing new in your case. The individuality of states argument is a faulty one. The people of the United States of America vote **not** the states. It doesn’t matter if 99% of America’s population are situated in Kansas, Baltimore, or even that place called Hell, Michigan. This is a government that is supposedly by the people and for the people. What bothered me about last election is that Gore should have won. The American people voted for Gore. The States votes for Bush. States \> American people. Bush Wins What is going on here? If States are supposed to mirror the desire of the American people then why is there such an inconsistency? Why even bother showing the American people the popular vote? It’s such a slap in the face to everyone who took time to take part of the election. The Electoral College is an antiquated system, but I don’t believe in throwing it out. I feel that Presidents that win the EC but not the popular vote should have a big star by their name that indicates that the American people did not want this person as a President. - Honesty ---
**Author:** ![Honesty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f04885/32.png) [@Honesty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Honesty)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2003, 6:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-gwb-is-re-elected-but/206163/103 "2003-10-21T06:47:43Z")
To supplement my previous post. When I say astrik, I mean everytime the President’s name is seen in text it would say: “George W. Bush\* is a great man” Little Girl: Why does this President have a little star by his name? Mother: Because the American people did not vote for him sweetie - the States did. Little Girl: ooooh! I know something like this would never happen, but something needs to be said about Presidents who really did not “win” the vote of the American people. The problem, of course, is that most people can represent themselves - or at least want to - and have no desire to have their State represent for them. Whew! - Honesty ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2003, 7:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-gwb-is-re-elected-but/206163/104 "2003-10-21T07:09:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Honesty \* > Hmm, lots of things have been abolished and adjusted since the drafting of the Constitution. Nothing new in your case. No argument. Get a constitutional amendment passed to eliminate the EC and I’ll be on board. I won’t think it’s a good idea, but I won’t come back and say “Well he won the popular vote, but he wouldn’t have won the EC vote and therefore he’s not a valid president”. I’d recognize that the rules had changes, per the will of the people, and that’s that. > [@](#): > > The individuality of states argument is a faulty one. The people of the United States of America vote **not** the states. It doesn’t matter if 99% of America’s population are situated in Kansas, Baltimore, or even that place called Hell, Michigan. I’m not sure what your point is. Have you read the consitution? If you did you would realize that the American people **most emphatically do not** elect the president directly. You may wish they did, but that doesn’t make it so. > [@](#): > > This is a government that is supposedly by the people and for the people. What bothered me about last election is that Gore should have won. > > The American people voted for Gore. > The States votes for Bush. > States \> American people. > Bush Wins Gore won the popular vote. That and $3.00 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. I could say that I think a completed pass on the 1 yard line with 0 seconds left in the game should count as a touchdown, and therefore the Raiders’ game should’ve gone into overtime tonight. But that’s not the rule, and so it didn’t. The Raiders lost tonight according to the rules in place just as Gore lost according to the rules in place. If you ignore the rules, you can get any outcome you want. > [@](#): > > What is going on here? If States are supposed to mirror the desire of the American people then why is there such an inconsistency? States are **not** supposed to mirror the desire of the popular vote. Why do you make that assumption? The EC was put in place specifically to allow the States (as political entities) to elect the president. > [@](#): > > Why even bother showing the American people the popular vote? It’s such a slap in the face to everyone who took time to take part of the election. Everyone who took part in the election should know the rules. The rules are that the Electoral Vote determines the president. Nothing tricky about it. > [@](#): > > The Electoral College is an antiquated system, but I don’t believe in throwing it out. I feel that Presidents that win the EC but not the popular vote should have a big star by their name that indicates that the American people did not want this person as a President. Funny, but the rest of your post is based on the assumption that the EC is not a valid method to determine the president. Whatever. Go ahead and put 3 stars by Bush’s name if it makes you feel better. At the end of the day, though, he’s the duly elected president per the method used in the US for electing presidents. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2003, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-gwb-is-re-elected-but/206163/105 "2003-10-21T07:16:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Honesty \* > Little Girl: Why does this President have a little star by his name? > Mother: Because the American people did not vote for him sweetie - the States did. > Little Girl: ooooh! Correction: Little Girl: But mommy, we learned in our civics class today that our country was set up so that the States elected the president. He’s the president of The United **States**. You’re silly! Now tell me about the Senate… ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2003, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-gwb-is-re-elected-but/206163/106 "2003-10-21T13:09:38Z")
Little Girl, the star means he was elected by the Supreme Court. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2003, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-gwb-is-re-elected-but/206163/107 "2003-10-21T14:13:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ElvisL1ves \* > \*\*Little Girl, the star means he was elected by the Supreme Court. \*\* Yeah, and the Cubs should’ve gone to the World Series this year and the Raiders should’ve gone to the Super Bowl last year.:rolleyes: But they didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2003, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-gwb-is-re-elected-but/206163/108 "2003-10-21T14:49:37Z")
That was a bit jerkish of you. I was not commenting on what should have happened, but on what did happen. You’d do well to face it too. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2003, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-gwb-is-re-elected-but/206163/109 "2003-10-21T16:28:49Z")
I beg to differ. Bush was not “elected by the Supreme Court”. The Supreme Court ruled that Bush was duly elected by the American people thru the electoral college. Perhaps you would be wise to discern the difference between those two statements. alternatively: Little Girl: Mommy, can you help me with my homework? I need to write an essay on “What it means to be a sore loser”. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-gwb-is-re-elected-but/206163.md?page=5)