Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 06 2012 @ 09:49 PM EST |
While you are completely right about being apolitical, there is simply different
powers Obama and Romney have, so replacing one's name with another isn't right.
Perhaps a better change would have been to the Swedish party :D[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 06 2012 @ 10:21 PM EST |
The elections worked differently in the 19th century. The election puting in
the split administration was not decided by the House. At the time the
president and vice president did not run together as a single ticket, nor was
the vice president elected separately. At the time the Vice Precidency went to
the runner up in the Presidential election and there were usually more than two
competitive candiates.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: MadTom1999 on Wednesday, November 07 2012 @ 06:53 AM EST |
1876 Samuel J. Tilden won over 50% of the popular vote and the electoral college
then a few states said they hadn't declared really and magically Rutherford B
Hayes came out the winner.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 07 2012 @ 12:25 PM EST |
If the ballots are only being stuffed in Romney's favor and Obama wins (it's
official, he won) then I'd say:
From a recount perspective: forget it, not
important
From the software perspective: put it through a very thorough
audit and get the "software bugs" fixed, additionally, have a very thorough
audit performed against the software prior to the next election before stamping
it acceptable for the election.
And yes, the audit I suggest is not just
running the numbers through the software, but having various parties go through
the actual source code. Proprietary or not, such an election is important
enough proprietary secrets should be considered non-existent.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|