|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Oh No, The New Awesome Primary Thread | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
a fair counting of the popular vote and the inclusion of all voters in the process and reduction of voting machine fraud. Okay... and what would that accomplish?Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8546 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors... I'm not saying your outline is not effective. I'm saying it is not feasible. Right now each party selects its own set of Electors. Whichever candidate wins the popular vote in that state it is his party's slate of electors that, according to the state's election law, are the state's appointed electors. (BTW, the appointed electors from all states combined is said to be the "electoral college" though that term was not used until the early 1800s. It does appear in our present election law however as the "college of electors".) They are the ones who get to go to the state capital, sit in the state senate's chambers and cast their electoral votes, all votes being for their candidate for president and all votes being for their candidate for vice-president. The list of vote-getters sent to Washington has only two names on it. One unanimous selection for president and one unanimous selection for vice-president. That is all. That is the manner in which all but 2 state legislatures in this country have directed the appointment of their state's electors. This puts a lock on the state's electoral votes for the popular party of the time. It also creates roadblocks to national third-party organizations since the state's electoral votes are never split such that another party can gain any headway over time. You will not get any of the state legislatures to change this. The popular party will never agree to give up their lock on the electors and neither party will do anything to invite viable competition from a national third party.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1430 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
This puts a lock on the state's electoral votes for the popular party of the time. It also creates roadblocks to national third-party organizations since the state's electoral votes are never split such that another party can gain any headway over time. There are plenty of people that would like to see third parties be viable on both ends of the spectrum, and developing a way to break the two party system would seem popular.
You will not get any of the state legislatures to change this. The popular party will never agree to give up their lock on the electors and neither party will do anything to invite viable competition from a national third party. This is where voter initiatives can be employed: take the vote to the people and let them decide, rather than the interested parties.
I'm not saying your outline is not effective. I'm saying it is not feasible. Progress is worth fighting for, especially when it means revising a broken system. From the Occupy Movement/s to the independent voters to the Tea Party Birchers people across the political spectrum do not like the two party system. And the only way to change the system is to change the system. Either by evolution to "form a better union" or by revolution to destroy the current one ... Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
There are plenty of people that would like to see third parties be viable on both ends of the spectrum, and developing a way to break the two party system would seem popular.
Two words: preferential voting.Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1430 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
Two words: preferential voting. Indeed. Single person single vote is incapable of providing information on second and third choices etc, and when the field is packed with a number of candidates of varying quality it is possible to end up with a bad choice if several good choices split the other votes. Preferential voting - Wikipedia
quote: Of these I like "instant runoff" voting best - especially for primaries when there can be lots of candidates of many different levels of quality and a mix of positions.
If there is no majority, the person with the least votes is eliminated and has their voters first choices replaced by the voters second choices. If there is still no majority, the person with the least votes is also eliminated and has their voters first (or second) choices replaced by the voters second (or third) choices. etc Much more like getting a consensus of who would satisfy the most people than our current system that not only ensconces the two party system, but also tends to pick extreme candidates in each of the parties. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Yes, the Australian system is the one that I had in mind. It works pretty well.
Unfortunately, politicians are unlikely to implement it, since it would probably end the careers of many of them.Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3986 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.1
|
RAZD writes: Much more like getting a consensus of who would satisfy the most people than our current system that not only ensconces the two party system, but also tends to pick extreme candidates in each of the parties. We currently enjoy winner-take-all capitalism with ever-greater concentrations of wealth wielding their political clout to keep it that way. I'm not sure you can change that by tweaking the ballot. "If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
I want to speak to the lack of quantification in the statement below. Emphasis added by me
There are plenty of people that would like to see third parties be viable on both ends of the spectrum, and developing a way to break the two party system would seem popular. What does plenty here mean. Does it mean enough people to usurp (using only constitutional and plausible means) a power assigned in the federal constitution to the individual state legislatures, which are uniformly bodies completely invested in the two party system? Does plenty even mean "something close to the number of people who are okay with things as they are"? And what does "seem popular mean"? Is there any possibility of quantifying that phrase in a way that has some political meaning? Stats please?Je Suis Charlie Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 419 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
We certainly cannot change it as long as companies and corporations are considered as people with rights.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: |
Dr Adequate writes: Ted Cruz is the first to officially announce his candidacy For Presidency? ... Does this cause an issue?
quote: -Ted Cruz Wikipedia
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 637 days) Posts: 3228 Joined:
|
His mother was American, so constitutional lawyers feel that would qualify him for being a 'natural born citizen'. This, however, has not gone through the Supreme Court, so while that has probably true, a case might change that. I personally think it should be challenged and go through that supreme court just to put that issue to bed. This issue has nothing to do with my personal dislike of Cruz, but to settle the issue, so the campaigns can deal iwth the issues rather than a distraction.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1430 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
For Presidency? ... Does this cause an issue?
quote: -Ted Cruz Wikipedia See The Brand New Birther Thread ...
For Presidency? ... Does this cause an issue? Only if he gets elected ... Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1280 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
I personally think it should be challenged and go through that supreme court just to put that issue to bed. One potential problem with this is that a compelling argument can be made that unless and until he's actually elected, there's nothing for the Supreme Court to decide. The Supremes are constitutionally limited in that they can only decide "Cases and Controversies." They have interpreted this to mean that they cannot answer hypothetical questions, there must be an actual dispute for them to resolve before they can hear a case. If Cruz is never elected, there's nothing for them to decide.Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 637 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
And now, the ex-ceo of HP, the one that almost drove it into the ground (Carly Fiorina says it is '90% likely she will run for president'
SHe is the one that said the economy is suffering because american workers are watching porn all day long Raw Story - Celebrating 18 Years of Independent Journalism - 404 Not Found
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1280 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
A big business egotist who knows absolutely nothing about government and who's platform is apparently going to be based on blatant lies designed to pander to right wing idiots? She'll fit right in with the rest of the Tea Baggers.
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024