Do you support the rule of the majority?

[Elite1]

Rebel Horseman, Yes the Union did suffer heavier casualties than the Confederates, than again since they had a much larger military, they could afford more losses and a more aggresive campaign, but I don't believe your statement is true about winning every major and most minor battles on the home turf is true ...

"Instead we whipped the tar out of them for 4 hard years winning every major and most minor battles on our own turf. Stats show that in just about every single skirmish we were outnumbered 3 to 1 and sometimes more, and we still managed to kill more of them than they did us. "



Here are some stats... http://americancivilwar.com/cwstats.html

 

[Elite1]

Rebel Horseman, These are major battles lost by the Rebels on their own turf:



Champion Hill, Miss.

Ft. Donalson, Tenn.

Tulahouma, Tenn.

7 days battle, Virg.

Shiloh, Tenn.

Vicksburgh, Miss (many believe this was the key battle of the war)

Chatanooga, Tenn.

Peach Tree Creek, GA

Hoods Attack, ATL,GA

Franklin, Tenn.

Nashville, Tenn

and finally Appomattox, Virg. (where Lee surrendered)



Not trying to start a war..... I just enjoy history.

 

[Will24]

Rule of tha majority in the USA would not be possible, ever. Look at this past presidential election, see how divided america is?





exactly





-Will

 

[merryman]

If we did not have the electoral college system, the votes of the majority of the country geographically would never count!

The people in the half-dozen major metropolitan centers would have enough clout to elect our national leaders even if everyone in most of the country voted otherwise.

If you want to settle for whomever is chosen by NY city. , Chicago, Atlanta, LA, Seattle and their subburbs, then do away with our present system and go with majority vote---gives me the willies!!



Vaughn