Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: 1st amendment (was: religious courses in a secular school) Message-ID: Date: 28 Apr 91 22:19:19 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Free Software Foundation, Cambridge, MA Lines: 23 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article jclark@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (John Clark) writes: Here is the 'problem' with the current level of 'democracy'. In the past presidential election less than 50% of the elgible voters turned out, some 53% of those voted for Bush(I ignore the electorial collage, since I trying to indicate what the 'people' want). Hence less than 25% of the 'voter' population actually expressed support for Bush. This is a red herring. The eligible people who did not vote were not ignored. Their wishes *were* taken into account, and they *did* affect the decision. Ignoring minor candidates for the moment, there were three different preferences people could express: Bush, Mondale, and "don't care". The people who don't attend the polls still "vote", for they cast a virtual ballot of abstention. Those people who did not vote do even better than we who do vote, for they always get their choice. They cannot be disappointed with the result, for they expressed a lack of concern in the result. Since slightly over 50% of the population expressed a lack of concern for the result, we have about 78% who are happy with Bush and about 73% (if your numbers are correct) who would have been happy with Mondale. -mib