The Observation Deck

I think I've got this right:

MAJORITY VOTE means MAJORTIY VOTE

To make it clearer, here is an example of MAJORITY VOTE: if Mike Skindell gets more votes than Mike Summers, he will be elected the Mayor of Lakewood by a MAJORITY VOTE.

I learned that in Civics class in 1975 at LHS--that was a log time ago.

So maybe somebody who took the class in this century (or better yet this decade) can tells us if that was somehow changed on us more recently???

Brian Essi wrote:
To make it clearer, here is an example of MAJORITY VOTE: if Mike Skindell gets more votes than Mike Summers, he will be elected the Mayor of Lakewood by a MAJORITY VOTE.

Just to be clear, the scenario above is valid only if there are two options. For example, if three people are running, the top vote recipient might not be a majority vote getter.

With a yes/no issue, then the top vote recipient would be majority. But if there are more than two options, it is quite likely that the top vote recipient does not receive a majority of votes.

It's really annoying the lengths they will go to to obsfucate the issues. This elector - voter thing is really out there. They want to scare people with scenarios of a barren block and empty buildings (I think Lakewood currently has a few of those BTW) and contorted word games and imaginary election situations that would never be able to happen.

If all you can do is play the doom and gloom game, your plan isn't good enough to sell on its merits. Learn from the West End debacle.