- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Such a system constitutes an invitation to election fraud, by placing national elections within a handful of precincts in a single state. ... is it not far more unjust that most big cities and states are irrelevant in national elections (e.g., California in 2000 and 2004)?
OK, let's stop and think now. You're worried about the potential for fraud within a "handful of precincts in a single state" but apparently don't think that's even easier to engineer in only one or two princincts in a single city?
And you don't seem concerned about all those "red" voters in "blue" states who have their votes nullified by the big cities within their states. Look at that famous red/blue map and look at "blue" states like New York, Illinois and California. County by country, they're mostly red, yet those states electoral votes go "blue" because of the popoulations of one or two large cities within those states.
In short, you're highly selective in your worrying about whose votes get "counted" and whose don't.
