Your New Scoop Site

Welcome to Scoop!

To help you figure things out, there is a Scoop Admin Guide which can hopefully answer most of your questions.

Some tips:

Most of the layout is changed in "Blocks", found in the admin tools menu
Features can be turned on and off, and configured, in "Site Controls" in the admin tools menu
Stories have an "edit" link right beside the "Full Story" link on an index page, and right beside the "Post a Comment" link on the full story page. They can also be edited by clicking the story title in the "Story List" admin tool
Boxes are what allow you to write new features for Scoop; they require a knowledge of the perl programming language to work with effectively, although you can often make small changes without knowing much perl. If you would like a feature added but cannot program it yourself, ScoopHost does custom Scoop programming as one of its services.
If you aren't sure where to look for a particular feature or piece of display, try the "Search Admin Tools" link in the admin tools menu.

For support, questions, and general help with Scoop, email support@scoophost.com

ScoopHost.com is currently running Scoop version Undeterminable from .

Tag: potentially North Carolina and Nevada

The District Method - History and Explanation

By Kevin Rex Heine, Section News
Posted on Mon Jan 21, 2013 at 02:20:27 PM EST
Tags: 2012 Presidential Election (by congressional district), Electoral College, 3 USC § 1 & 7, quadrennial presidential elections, states vs. people balance, small states vs. large states balance, popular support vs. distributed support, U. S. Constitution Article 2 § 1 clauses 2 thru 4, U. S. Constitution Amendment XII, original intention, Congressional District Method, Maine, Nebraska, Pennsylvania (pending), Ohio (pending), Virginia (pending), Wisconsin (pending), Michigan (pending), Florida (pending), potentially North Carolina and Nevada, National Popular Vote is constitutionally irrelevant, Maryland (wants out), New Jersey (wants out), Illinois, Hawaii, Washington, Massachusetts, District of Columbia, Vermont, California, New York (not interested), Pennsylvania (not interested), Guarantee Clause, U. S. Constitution Article 4 § 4 clause 1, Massachusetts Variant, Maine Variant, New York Variant, Virginia Variant, Electoral District Method, Tennessee Variant (all tags)

You may have heard of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, an initiative being advanced by a Soros-funded group that intends to bypass the Constitution and obviate the Electoral College, handing the quadrennial presidential elections to whomever wins the plurality of the nationwide popular vote. This article isn't the place to go into the details of the initiative (the link provides a usable starting point for further research), but suffice it that triggering the compact will realize something that has been a strategic objective of the progressives for quite some time.

However, America is not a democracy; rather, the United States are a republic. And that distinction isn't one of mere semantics. In a republic, the voice of the people is more indirect the more non-local the matter is. When it comes to elections, I can think of none more non-local than the presidential election. Among the checks and balances the Founding Fathers included in the Constitution was the balance of the voice of the people with the voice of the states, thus the use of the Electoral College to elect the president every four years.