>>>>When your opponents start electing no hopers its got to be good news.
>>>>
>>>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11301034
>>>>
>>>>http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/15/christine-odonnell-media-reaction
>>>
>>>I am not underestimating the Tea Party. There is a lot of anger in this country, and their members are getting involved. It's going to be interesting to see what happens in November.
>>>
>>>Also on politics, although not the Tea Party, I read an article recently saying England is going to be changing its electoral system. It was part of the deal forming the coalition government. The article speculated that it might lead to the U.S. finally junking the electoral college. In a way that's hard for me to believe, since small states will presumably fight to keep it and prevent a 75% plurality, but what a stupid system. I did not know that it goes back hundreds of years, to the Catholic church in Venice.
>>
>>I learned it is traced back to the Centurial Assembly system of the Roman Republic....
>
>Similar but a bit different:
>
>Each Century received one vote, regardless of how many electors each Century held.
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_Assembly
>
>Very interesting article, including the origin of some common words like augur and auspices.

Each Century was entitled to cast only one vote. An individual's vote was counted within his Century and determined the outcome of the Century's vote. Because only the first eighteen (and richest) Centuries were kept to the nominal size of 100 members (hence 100 = 1 vote), it was disproportionate.