Guest guest Posted November 6, 2000 Report Share Posted November 6, 2000 Hi All! I take it that many are frantically checking the chances of Bush and Gore. Personally I find the chances, no matter how I look at it, are 50/50. Can there be a tie? I don´t understand the system, but heard that that one can get a majority one way but not the other so that he cannot become president. how does this work out and what happens then? Regards Mani Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 6, 2000 Report Share Posted November 6, 2000 >Can there be a tie? I don´t understand the system, but heard that that one can >get a majority one way but not the other so that he cannot become president. how >does this work out and what happens then? It's complicated. Don't say you weren't warned: There are actually three different elections involved: 1. Tomorrow is the popular vote. 2. December 18 is the electoral college vote. 3. January 6 is when Congress meets to count the electoral college votes, and if the electoral college fails to elect by a suitable majority, the appropriate house then elects the president and vice president. Here's the explanation: Tomorrow, we don't actually vote for the president. We vote for people who will represent us at a state convention. Each state gets assigned so many "electoral votes" in a general convention called the electoral college. The number of votes each state gets is determined by adding together their number of senators (always two) plus their number of representatives (always at least one; determined each decade by that state's population), so even the smallest state gets three electoral votes. The largest, California, gets 54. Tomorrow, we select the 535 members of this electoral college. We don't actually vote for the president; we vote for the (generally nameless) electors who are pledged to vote for a certain candidate at the convention meeting some weeks later. In most states, whichever candidate gets MOST of the votes get ALL of that state's electoral votes. So if Illinois--the state I live in now--with 22 electoral votes gives Mr A 51% of the vote and Mr. B 49%, then Mr. A gets ALL 22 of Illinois' electoral votes. (Not every state is like that; there are two exceptions.) (Note well.) On December 18, the electors assemble at their respective state capitols to make their (pro forma) votes. THAT is the date of the REAL election. Those votes are then sent to Congress, where on January 6, they are combined with the votes from each of the other electoral colleges. Congress then counts the votes in a general session called for that purpose. They first count the number of votes for president. Whoever gets greater than 50% of the electoral votes wins that office. If there are more than two candidates receiving electoral votes, though, it's possible that nobody gets the required 50% + 1. I believe that this is the tie case you were referring to. In this case, the House of Representatives immediately convenes for the purpose of electing the president themselves. Each state gets precisely ONE vote, with whomever getting 26 votes (50% of 50 states plus 1) becoming the president. There is a similar process for the vice president, except that if nobody receives a majority in the electoral college votes, the Senate decides that office instead of the House of Representatives. So, there are actually several ways in which the candidate who received the popular vote might not actually be elected the president: The winner-take-all structure of the electoral college allows large states (like New York and California) to overpower smaller states in certain circumstances, and should nobody receive the required majority in the electoral college, the House of Representatives would decide who wins, independent of whatever the popular vote happened to be. It seems bizarre to many people that we don't actually vote for our president, but there is a method to the madness. The United States sees itself as a federation of states rather than a single entity unto its own. As such, it is the STATES who elect the president, NOT the people directly. Hope this helped. jpd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2000 Report Share Posted November 19, 2000 Dear US members, Sometimes on the list and mostly in direct email I had repeatedly asked for what would happen if the voting would end in a tie. The answers were interesting, but not 100% clear. But what I feared and semi-predicted was a tie. This has happened. Seeing certain Pluto influences, I also predicted irregularities in the polling. this too seems to be certain. Now, I see a period of danger for Al Gore, esp. after the middle of December. A frame up or an attempt on his life. This would mean that he has won! Otherwise these attacks would not be necessary at all! PRAY FOR HIM! Not that he is an angel. But the US is no longer the land of infinite opportunity. Rightly so: the "infinite" resources are also limited and would have run out in course of time anyhow. It is time the country thinks of conservation and having a social state. Elbowing out the weak cannot and should not go on. A democrat at the wheel is better than opportunist. But Jews , considering how few they really are, have produced more geniuses and servants of mankind than any other group (except perhaps Brahmins)! The greatest Prime minister of Great Britain, who brought the greatest prosperity with peaceful means, was a Jew, Benjamin Disraeli..... It would do America good to be led by a good Jew; for the rest of the world a democrat at the helm of the most powerful nation would be more welcome than a republican opportunist! Not that I forget the "sweat-shops" run by the Jews. Nor do I think the Jewish millionaires of Nassau County got their money by "legal" or "moral" means. But somehow Jews have not forgotten their ideals and, given a chance, give generously. Their respect and trying for for learning is a "Brahmin" trait! Once again, pray for Al´s safety! Mani Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2000 Report Share Posted November 19, 2000 Hi again Phyllis, I thought you would find this communication to my Vedic Astrology internet group of interest. Mani is an Indian who lives in Berlin--he is quite a scholar and philospher and sends his personal musings on various topics to the list every so often. I have started to get a very bad feeling about the ultimate outcome of this election. Peace! At 10:12 AM 11/19/00 +0100, you wrote: >Dear US members, > >Sometimes on the list and mostly in direct email I had repeatedly asked for what >would happen if the voting would end in a tie. The answers were interesting, >but not 100% clear. But what I feared and semi-predicted was a tie. This has >happened. Seeing certain Pluto influences, I also predicted irregularities in >the polling. this too seems to be certain. > >Now, I see a period of danger for Al Gore, esp. after the middle of December. A >frame up or an attempt on his life. This would mean that he has won! Otherwise >these attacks would not be necessary at all! > >PRAY FOR HIM! Not that he is an angel. But the US is no longer the land of >infinite opportunity. Rightly so: the "infinite" resources are also limited and >would have run out in course of time anyhow. It is time the country thinks of >conservation and having a social state. Elbowing out the weak cannot and should >not go on. A democrat at the wheel is better than opportunist. > > >But Jews , considering how few they really are, have produced more >geniuses and servants of mankind than any other group (except perhaps Brahmins)! >The greatest Prime minister of Great Britain, who brought the greatest >prosperity with peaceful means, was a Jew, Benjamin Disraeli..... > >It would do America good to be led by a good Jew; for the rest of the world a >democrat at the helm of the most powerful nation would be more welcome than a >republican opportunist! Not that I forget the "sweat-shops" run by the Jews. >Nor do I think the Jewish millionaires of Nassau County got their money by >"legal" or "moral" means. But somehow Jews have not forgotten their ideals and, >given a chance, give generously. Their respect and trying for for learning is a >"Brahmin" trait! >Once again, pray for Al´s safety! > >Mani > > > > >gjlist- > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2000 Report Share Posted November 19, 2000 Dear Mani, You have really introduced politics on this list in a way which is off topic. I don't think Al Gore is an opportunist- I feel he is in bed with international bankers and the new world order in a way which is treasonous. Bush, too. They both co-operate with big oil and both have links to British royalty- G. Prescott Bush was even knighted by royalty and Clinton was a Rhodes scholar. They only differ in minor issues, such as gun control, abortion, ecology, ect. Both obey othe mandates than the popular vote but give the impression of being different. The game is called " good cop, bad cop." They wink at each other. This is just my opinion, but this is the road which we start going down when we introduce out and out politics on the list. I would be interested in hearing about the candidates in relation to their charts, though. Maybe we could channel the discussion that way. Dharmapada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2000 Report Share Posted November 19, 2000 Dean wrote: > Dear Mani, > > You have really introduced politics on this list in a way which is off > topic. Sorry! I did not mean to misuse the list. It was very very quiet and I thought it was because everyone was glued to the TV waiting for a decision. I have no faith in politicians. They are all crooks. What they say openly does not reveal what goes on behind the scenes. It is a question of whose image is 8probably!) better for the people! My chief aim was - based on my astrology - to ask people to pray for Gore in December. As a european citizen, I´d rather have him set the trend. regards Mani Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2000 Report Share Posted November 19, 2000 Mani: I might have missed it, but what is your astrological reasoning behind the danger to Gore? I have a sense that he will be in danger too, although not so soon. I do see him doing well between now and December -- this might be because of a victory although who knows, it might only be some court decision. Transiting Rahu will be aspecting Mercury (23Aq) very soon and I think this will help Al because 1)Rahu is in the 10th in the natal chart and its dispositor Mars is in lagna; 2) Mercury, although in the 8th, is exalted in dashamsha; and 3) if you follow Krishnamurti ayanamsha, Mercury is Gore's current dasha lord. Chris At 11:24 PM 11/19/00 +0100, you wrote: >Dean wrote: >> Dear Mani, >> >> You have really introduced politics on this list in a way which is off >> topic. > >Sorry! I did not mean to misuse the list. It was very very quiet and I thought >it was because everyone was glued to the TV waiting for a decision. > >I have no faith in politicians. They are all crooks. What they say openly does >not reveal what goes on behind the scenes. It is a question of whose image is >8probably!) better for the people! > >My chief aim was - based on my astrology - to ask people to pray for Gore in >December. As a european citizen, I´d rather have him set the trend. > >regards >Mani > > > >gjlist- > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.