>Of course, this works better in an actual democracy.
>Things like the Electoral College, and breaking voters up
>into electorates or states, defeats the purpose. "Isn't
>the whole point supposed to be "one person, one vote"?
>Shouldn't your vote count the same no matter where you
>live or who your neighbours are?

>Strangely enough, this is actually the case - as long as you
>don't live in the U.S.A.

That is because the U.S.A isn't a democracy. We are a republic. The wisdom of such an arrangement becomes more apparent to me each election. It keeps the industrial/urban centers from imposing their will on the rural just because the city folk live closer to their neighbors. One person one vote works in smaller populations but if you look at this link you will see why it doesn't work well in countries the size of the U.S.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/vote2000/cbc/map.htm

Oh ... and about Canada invading again. Bring it on. The only negative impact that would have from my perspective is that it would add two more Democratics to our Senate.