Kerry takes the presidential election
 

I know most of the major players here and where they stand. More than a few have some great minds regarding politics, even though I strongly disagree with their leanings.

I am convinced that we are near critical mass in the US. The country is polarized more than any time than I can remember. The elections, in my opinion, will not settle any disputes or create any unity. They will further divide us all. Will one half of the voting public just stand down and accept defeat?? Not a chance, it will energize both sides to push their agendas even further, legally or illegally.

The winning team will glow with the idea that they won fair and square through the effective use of the system, and they will be wrong. The losing team will be convinced that they were somehow cheated and they need not accept the results of the contest, and they will also be wrong.

So will we be headed into a civil war? What will be the "first volley from Ft. Sumpter"? Has it already been fired? What will a civil war look like this time around? The lines are not geographic but I am convinced that there is at least as much fervor over the modern political issues as there was during the Civil War.

So here's the scenario. Kerry takes office, after a landslide victory.

What is happening to the economy? Terrorism? Jobs? Crime? How does the "mood" of the country change? What direction are we now headed with Kerry in office?

Why will they be wrong?

Kerry is as big a dumbass as Bush is. Look at his voting record and tell me what he brings to the table. He stands for nothing.

So whom do you suggest we should vote for? This election is once again trying to prove my theory that the good candidates (of both parties) get eliminated by the primaries.

They will be wrong in the minds of the losing team. They will claim some injustice of one kind or another and that will give them the moral highground to ignore the laws and the new leader(s)

The day after the election, no matter who wins, I will go to work, put out the trash, and go on with the rest of my life. Just like I've done after every other election. Priorities, man. I suspect most people will do the same.

Unfortunately my trash collection is on Tuesday night, so the trash will sit there for an entire week. But, tradition is important.

You act as if there actually are good candidates.

A politician is inherently venal and conciliatory. Not a winning combination.

I say vote for whomever you can put up with. This new prez is going to be prez for four long years. Take a look at all possibilites (including the Indepenents, Green party, et al) and then choose which one you think you can deal with for those four years. That way if your choice wins, in those four years, you'll spend less time getting your blood pressure up over what the guy's doing because you'll know your vote counted towards the one you wanted. Personally, I think I can put up with Kerry more than I can put up with Bush at the moment, granted, I haven't really taken a good look at all the possibilties. So that might change.

What are the rules that apply if neither candidate made enough percentage to win?

Imagine a world where enough people voted for themselves or others and the Pres had to stay Pres by default. If anything could raise people's eyebrows that might do it.

Very interesting possibility TS.

I believe that all a candidate needs is a simple majority of the Electoral college, so that scenerio won't come to pass. It's interesting that fewer and fewer people are voting while the country is supposed to be more and more divided. I'd say a majority just don't give a crap and will get their exercise putting out the trash on Tuesday instead of hiking to the polling station.

OOOPS The candidate for president with the most electoral votes, provided that it is an absolute majority (one over half of the total), is declared president. Similarly, the vice presidential candidate with the absolute majority of electoral votes is declared vice president.
In the event no one obtains an absolute majority of electoral votes for president, the U.S. House of Representatives (as the chamber closest to the people) selects the president from among the top three contenders with each State casting only one vote and an absolute majority of the States being required to elect. Similarly, if no one obtains an absolute majority for vice president, then the U.S. Senate makes the selection from among the top two contenders for that office.

That would be a problem wouldn't it. Now that I think of it, isn't this the way the Hayes election went, ending radical reconstruction?

http://www.fec.gov/pages/ecworks.htm

For that to happen, Nader or Badnarik would actually have to take a state, and the Bush and Kerry would have to be almost tied. The former is just about impossible under the current system, so I wouldn't worry.

Shhhhh! Don't let Radar hear you say that.

I'm sure he would be the first to agree that the system has been massively tilted against third parties.