Thanks to LDTT reader Jimmy for pointing out that for many voters in the USA the best way to make your vote count in November is often just to donate as much money as you can. This is thanks to the antiquated and undemocratic institution known as the electoral college. That's the reason that in 2000 Bush still managed to swing the Presidency inspite of losing the popular vote by over 500,000 votes.

Of course some (including me) might also say that it was actually one vote in the the Supreme Court that did it since ultimately, it was them who had a say in whether the votes should be completely re-counted in Florida. But really, if it wasn't for the electoral college system the few hundred disputed votes in Florida would have been irrelevant, even the 40,000 or so mostly democratic voting citizens illegally struck from the register by Florida would have been irrelevant. Indeed the electoral college system brings up scads of questions about the legitimacy of America dictating what is freedom and democracy when we still have such an anachronistic system selecting our Presidents.

Originally the electoral college system was designed as a compromize between the various States to ensure that a President couldn't skip over the small less densely populated states and just campaign in the places where big cities were located. Basically they wanted to ensure that large rural areas still had some say and weren't forced to abide by the wishes of a few small big city States. In theory the electoral college for a State has the ability to cast its votes in anyway it pleases, even proportionately to the number of democrat and republican votes cast in that state. In reality few ever do, most noticeably in Florida 2000 where the votes were so closely split between Bush and Gore that it was basically who won was hidden by the margin of error of the antiquated punch card voting system used.

So, thanks to the electoral college system we actually get the complete opposite of the phenomenom it was designed to prevent. Candidates expend vitually all their resources campaigning in less densely populated and rural swing states. California and other solidly democratic states will receive scare attention from the Presidential campaign since they are assumed to be a slam dunk for the DNC. That means many voters in such States end up feeling disenfranchised and disinclined to vote at all. Thus the best way to make your vote count in a non-swing state is to reach for your pocket book and donate to your party, candidate or PAC of choice and ensure that the swing states receive the message from your candidate's of choice. Personally I loathe this idea that selecting a President in this country all comes down to money but those are the ground rules that have been forced on the citizenry by the super-citizens that prey on us - the Corporations. Without their massively undemocratic influence on our political system and governments such things might not actually be necessary.

And do you know what is even more bizarre? I as a non-citizen can donate to a PAC like MoveOn and help them pay for issue adds that will help influence the Presidential selection. Hence even I, non-voter - can in some way have my vote. Of course as a resident, a tax payer to Federal, State, and local governments, and someone who can be drafted to defend the United States see no reason why I shouldn't be able to. In fact I'd go further in saying I believe I should be able to actually vote otherwise its just taxation without representation.

In the mean time I suggest all you right thinking Anybody But Bush Again voters in places like California consider trotting over to MoveOn PAC and making donations to some of their many issue ad campaigns. While you're at it you can go watch Justice Is Duck Blind about Cheney and the Supreme Court. Seeing Bush as a dog fetching rabbits may be funny, but the reality is its the points about Cheney and Scalia are all sickeningly true, but according to Scalia, irrelevant to whether he is impartial to judging Cheney.