Letters to the Editor
anonny
Published Letters: 124 Editor's Choice: 13
-
Why don't Democrats do the same?
[Read the article: GOP's not-so-secret weapon fails]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In one ad run against Cazayoux, Republicans said, "A vote for Don Cazayoux is a vote for Barack Obama and [House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi."
I really don't get why Democrats don't run ads in places like California and Maine pointing out that a vote for your local "nice" Republican is a vote for the next Tom Delay, Trent Lott, and (for Senate candidates), Antonin Scalia.
Similarly, Democrats in "Blue" states should run ads pointing out that when the Republicans owned Congress they skewed discretionary domestic spending by a huge ratio towards Republican states. I'd like to see an ad in California comparing the highways in California to those in Kansas, then comparing the massive amount of federal dollars sent to Kansas versus those sent to California. The message: a vote for your local "nice" Republican is a vote to send your tax dollars to a Red state -- and thus a vote to increase your state taxes to compensate.
-
Why a fair solution is so hard to find
[Read the article: Clinton writes to Obama]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The issue of Michigan and Florida votes is more complicated than it seems, and finding a fair resolution is close to impossible.
For example, consider the question of the Michigan re-vote. Seems pretty simple, doesn't it? Just re-vote. Only there is the question of who gets to vote. The default re-vote proposal states that only those who voted in the earlier primary, and only those who voted Democrat, can participate in the re-vote. This would prevent first-time voters, independents, and cross-over voters (three categories that Obama has drawn votes from). On the other hand, if you allow those other voters, then nothing prevent Republicans from participating in the re-vote to try to skew the Democratic results. In recent primaries this seems to have favored Clinton, but reports are that Republicans now are favoring Obama as the more beatable candidate.
Now, for Florida the situation is not quite so bad as Obama was on the original ballot. Even there, though, both sides have claimed that the other broke the "no campaign" rules for Florida, so just accepting the original result isn't necessarily appropriate. Furthermore, the numbers indicate that middle-of-the-roaders were more likely in Florida to choose to vote in the Republican primary than they were in almost any other state, likely because they knew in advance that the Democratic votes wouldn't count. So, the lack of the middle-of-the-road voter could have distorted that vote.
In the end, the situation is simply bad. The original votes are spoiled and there is no fair way to revote. Best is to offer a proportional allocation to the two states, and to fix the rules to prevent a future repeat.
-
Where desktops win
[Read the article: Are laptop PCs the environmentally correct choice?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In situations where a desktop is as viable as a laptop, there is a good bet that it will last a longer -- perhaps a lot longer -- than a laptop.
First, the MTBF (mean time between failure) of desktop components is typically a lot longer than for a laptop. For example, a lot of the causes of laptop failure have to do with the screen, which is jiggled about and moved, even if the laptop itself rarely moves. A desktop monitor, on the other hand, is likely to last a long, long time.
Second, component replacement is often simple with a desktop. Spill a drink on your keyboard? Get a new one for under $50 for your desktop -- whereas with your laptop you'll probably have to replace many internal components, such as the motherboard. (Now laptops are getting better in this area -- you can now replace a hard drive in most laptops with less effort than for a desktop -- but of course the laptop drive will cost at least twice as much.)
Taken together, these two points mean that your typical desktop may have twice the lifespan as your typical laptop.
In my own house we still have the 3 desktops I purchased over the past 5 years, but have had to replace laptops (we have 3) 4 times during that span. I did make upgrades or repairs to all the desktops at some point, but never was the cost even close to that of a new system.