Non-Fuego Political Thread

“im really really really hoping this doesnt turn into fuego, but knowing how things work around here.........

anyway, this is a curiousity question i keep meaning to post and never get around to but its something that sticks in my craw....

during the presidential elections, it was noted that (of course) the election comes down to the swing states, and that if you really get down to it, winning 2 of the 3 biggest swing states (florida, ohio, pennsylvania) means a virtual lock. i find it disturbing that the fate of the most powerful nation on the planet is decided by such a small fraction of the world.

my question is, without ripping on anybodys party, when was the last time a president won the election without winning at least 2 out of the 3? also, is it a rule that the winner must have a majority of votes to become president, and that is the reason we stick with the electoral college and dont go to popular voting (since many times in history a president has won without majority of popular votes)?

id look this up myself right now but im starving so its time for lunch”

“You don't have to win the popular vote. W didn't in 2000. I don't know about the rest of it.

Non-Fuego Political Thread. Is that a connundrum or an oxymoron?”

“you still have to win enough of teh other states as well, but I get your point”

“"you still have to win enough of teh other states as well"

well, obviously. thats why we have so-called red and blue states, always voting pub or dem. and the tiny widdle swing states like nh or ia (sorry lizs) are too small to make a difference

and ppl wonder why there is so much voter apathy when the votes of only 3 states really matter”

“"im really really really hoping this doesnt turn into fuego"

crash bang
11:51:21 AM
4/12/05

How could you possibly have developed such an expectation. Did you forget to take your meds or something?

And yes to become Pres. you must have a majority of the electoral vote.
last edited: 4/12/05 11:58:14 AM”

“ok, everyone is mis-understanding the question

the question is: when was the last time a president won the election without winning at least 2 out of the 3?”

“We're all to lazy to look it up too.”

“i didnt ask if you have to have a majority of the electoral or majority of the popular. i learned that in high school gubmint. focus, ppl, focus!”

“i just thought that since there were so many highly expert political analysts and gumbint advisors here that someone could just pull it off the top of their heads

end sarcasm font

maybe i should have made this fuego and id get more responses from the high gods of political debate”

“poli- meaning many

tics- blood-sucking insects”

“"is it a rule that the winner must have a majority of votes to become president"

"i didnt ask if you have to have a majority of the electoral or majority of the popular"

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...........”

“The question about when was the last time someone won two of the three without getting elected seems irrelevant within the context of query as the "battleground" changes over time.”

“"is it a rule that the winner must have a majority of votes to become president, and that is the reason we stick with the electoral college and dont go to popular voting (since many times in history a president has won without majority of popular votes)?"

in other words, am i correct in assuming that having the most votes but not a majority (i believe thats called a "plurality"?) wouldnt cut it?

which brings up another question. what if some third party candidate actually won a state or two, and nobody got majority of electoral votes? anarchy!”

“It's too simplistic of a question. It assumes that the fate of the world relies on those 3 states, when the reality is it has only come down to them lately after much politicking in other states.”

“BTW -

Last person to win two of those three without becoming Pres. was Nixon in 1960.”

“No Crash, if there is no majority in the electoral vote the House elects the President.”

“its just a curiousity question. im not going to try to make a point. its just to satisfy my curiousity. thank you bison for answering my question, but lets try not to take this too seriously”

“which brings up another question. what if some third party candidate actually won a state or two, and nobody got majority of electoral votes? anarchy!

See 12th Amendment”

“and now that my question has been answered, y'all are free to fuego the hell out of it”

“its just a curiousity question. im not going to try to make a point. its just to satisfy my curiousity. thank you bison for answering my question, but lets try not to take this too seriously

Don't worry. You're not taken seriously.”

“"See 12th Amendment"

i assume this is in accord with bisons answer?”

“sarge, dont you have some godless liberals to proselytize?
last edited: 4/12/05 12:18:08 PM”

“"...The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. ..."

From the 12th Amendment to the Constitution
last edited: 4/12/05 12:18:26 PM”

“cb - Don't you have some potato chips to gormandize?”

“the fat comments are really stupid, sarge. ill hike you into the ground any fcking day.”

““and now that my question has been answered, y'all are free to fuego the hell out of it”
crash bang
1:14:19 PM
4/12/05
ignore this user

You commie-nazi.
8D”

“I hate commie-nazis almost as much as I hate Illinois Nazis!”

“the fat comments are really stupid, sarge. ill hike you into the ground any fcking day.

That's what I'm afraid of. You'll be hiking and the avalanche will bury me right into the ground.”

“whatever, sarge. i was in shape enough to put more than 2000 miles under my boots last year, including 9 days in the whites, so what the fck ever.

look, i cant stand you, you cant stand me, so if you can resist the childish digs from this point forward, so can i. like i said, non-fuego thread. deal?”

“whatever, sarge. i was in shape enough to put more than 2000 miles under my boots last year, including 9 days in the whites, so what the fck ever.

Wow! That's almost 5.5 miles a day. You must be ripped!

look, i cant stand you, you cant stand me, so if you can resist the childish digs from this point forward, so can i. like i said, non-fuego thread. deal?

No way man! You said "and now that my question has been answered, y'all are free to fuego the hell out of it", and I'm holding you to it.”

“It doesn't come down to just swing states. All states count. These states wouldn't even be "swing" states if other states didn't vote as they did. We just take for granted non-swing states, but they are in effect just as important. If California went red, it wouldn't necessarily matter what Ohio did. So it doesn't just come down to swing states, it comes down to all states. I have spoken, you may all sit down. Thank you and quit staring.”

“All political stuff should go yo fuego... that's how Matt categorizes things. Besides, one persons innocent question or statement is another person's troll bait.”

“

This guy even looks a little like C!B!. ;-)”

“Yes you must have a majority of electoral votes to win.

Interestingly enough we have had 15 presidentail elections were the winner had less than 50% of the electoral votes. All those elections had three or more candidates though.”

“Uh..... I'm not following the logic in your post HPM, did you mean 15 elections without 50% of the popular vote?(Which would be correct)”

“I hope we can keep this discussion civil, rational, and mature, buuuuut I expect those freaking loser pinko commie liberals who voted for that friggin' LOSER Kerry to ruin the discussion with their radical leftist liberal crap agenda trash junk talk.”

“Yep less than 50% of the popular vore.

I mis-typed.”

“Only once has a president been elected who didn't have the majority of electoral votes.

John Quincy Adams 1824”

“I miss Al Gore.”

“He's now inventing the internet-tv.”

“Link: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/04/05/MNGM6C3CB31.DTL”

“I think he's really pissed right now because G-Dub has his lockbox.”

“Lesson: Never put anything valuable in a lockbox and then go on national television and show everyone what's in it.”

“Especially when all you've got in the lockbox is Bill Clinton's little black book.”

“Ha Ha! This is about as fuego as a bunch of guys standing around smoking cigarettes near spilled gas!
last edited: 4/12/05 4:13:37 PM”

“There is no such thing as a "non-fuego political thread". The idea of Fuego as a category was so that those of us who actually come to The Backpacker.com to talk about BACKPACKING (I know, a radical idea), wouldn't be subjected to the BS associated with politics, etc. I could care less about your politcal questions & don't want to get involved in them when I come here.

That way, I, as a user, could simply de-selcect "fuego" as a category of crap I wanted to read.”

“and now that my question has been answered, y'all are free to fuego the hell out of it", and I'm holding you to it.”

damn. i did say that too soon.”

“thats why its under "chatter". non-inflammatory, non-backpacking topics are allowed under "chatter". i guess i had too much faith that a generic, non-partisan question could be non-inflammatory.”

“dont click on topics you know you want to avoid. are your eyes so sacred that it is profane for them to glance at words like "politics"? youre like the little old lady who sued mcdonalds for serving her hot coffee when the damn warning on the cup says "hot coffee"”