also, i still think it wouldn't be a bad idea to require voting by all citizens. are there pitfalls to that system i am not seeing (aside from some under-informed people just christmas-tree-ing the ballot, which i swear probably happens even today)? edit: i mean, i think the initial system was probably concocted with the optimism that everyone would vote. but unfortunately, we don't get anywhere near that. maybe if everyone just voted, the system would work the way it's supposed to???
You are really misunderstanding the concept. In a popular vote system, everyone's vote counts the same. So even though maine's population is lower than Texas's, a Maine resident and a Texas resident have the same impact on the overall election. Right now, in Jersey, my vote is worth NOTHING. That's pitiful. I have no reason to vote at all.
No taxation without representation.
THe guy who said "Democracies fear popular vote" is an knuclehead. Part of the criteria for a democracy to exist is a popular vote. The US is a republic, though I'd rather see it come closer to a democracy than stay back in the 18th century.
But you're misunderstanding the fundamentals of our government. We are not a group of individuals roaming at will. We are individuals tied to states. You can go wherever you want, but eventually to have to declair residency in one state or another. There is the crux, because people in Texas may be for the death penalty while people in Main are not. Why should the voices of Main residents be drown out?
You do have reason to vote even if you "think" your vote doesn't count. This is a prime example of voter apathy and its results:
also, i still think it wouldn't be a bad idea to require voting by all citizens. are there pitfalls to that system i am not seeing (aside from some under-informed people just christmas-tree-ing the ballot, which i swear probably happens even today)? edit: i mean, i think the initial system was probably concocted with the optimism that everyone would vote. but unfortunately, we don't get anywhere near that. maybe if everyone just voted, the system would work the way it's supposed to???
I have mixed feelings about this. To do this the government would have to hold elections in such a manner as to not interfear with careers. It tough to do. Secondly, you'd be removing the "RIGHT" to obstain in protest which is a form of free and protected speech. Also, forcing someone to vote does not make them a more informed voter...
But it does force civic responsability in the end doesn't it.
Yes Maine has proportional representation in the congress, but their representation for presidential elections would be null and void. So, if Main with its 4 representatives doesn't like a bill and the president was elected by the likes of Texas, Maine would lose its voice in federal government. This is the last response I'm gonna make here because our federal government is a series of checks and balances to limit powers, not a popularity contest. Remember Tyranny is always an option for you popular voters.
I have mixed feelings about this. To do this the government would have to hold elections in such a manner as to not interfear with careers. It tough to do. Secondly, you'd be removing the "RIGHT" to obstain in protest which is a form of free and protected speech. Also, forcing someone to vote does not make them a more informed voter...
But it does force civic responsability in the end doesn't it.
hmmm... good points. i always thought, though, that election days should be national or state holidays (or paid leave for half-days or something). that should take care of the career issue.
also, to fix the "abstain from voting as a choice" argument, that could also "be a vote." in other words, a vote saying "i don't like anyone, but thanks for the few hours off from work." the point is to get them to the voting booths. i am sure most people would vote, but many flat out don't even show up because they're tired after work, or have other stuff to do, etc. etc.
basically, anything we CAN do to fix the problem higher up to see if that helps the system. i'm kinda seeing if the problems in the electoral system aren't just symptoms to a slowly apathetic voting body.
edit: p.s. i don't see much that can easily help informing the voting public, but one step at a time. right now, our system totally benefits the popularity model, where quantity of ads can get you more votes than sheer ability (or in arnold's case in california, a few multi-million dollar movies and your face in every blockbuster).
First, thank god for faust9, he's saving sooo much typing What he said...
Quote:
Originally posted by Splinemodel
You are really misunderstanding the concept. In a popular vote system, everyone's vote counts the same. So even though maine's population is lower than Texas's, a Maine resident and a Texas resident have the same impact on the overall election. Right now, in Jersey, my vote is worth NOTHING. That's pitiful. I have no reason to vote at all.
No taxation without representation.
The guy who said "Democracies fear popular vote" is an knuclehead. Part of the criteria for a democracy to exist is a popular vote. The US is a republic, though I'd rather see it come closer to a democracy than stay back in the 18th century.
Why is your vote worth nothing? Because your guy lost? He didn't lose because of the Electoral College, he lost because not enough of your state's fellow residents 1: know about him and his stance on issues, 2: cared enough to vote at all 3: felt he was the right person for the job.
If the person you want doesn't win your state, tough titties, as my mom would say.
Seriously, did you make financial contributions to your guy's campaign? Did you go out and volunteer for his/her campaign? Did you make a website or post your opinion on local forums to spread the word? If all you did was stroll into the polling center at the last minute and pulled a lever or punched chad in the face, then no one is to blame for them losing except yourself, fellow believers, and the candidate and his blandness. (Not talking about Gore BTW ...not specifically )
When my guy loses (he did) you can throw that right back at me and I'll take it.
We simply have to not only become better citizens/voters but also better losers.
The old expression isn't "If I didn't win, it's broken, let's fix it"...
Comments
Originally posted by Splinemodel
You are really misunderstanding the concept. In a popular vote system, everyone's vote counts the same. So even though maine's population is lower than Texas's, a Maine resident and a Texas resident have the same impact on the overall election. Right now, in Jersey, my vote is worth NOTHING. That's pitiful. I have no reason to vote at all.
No taxation without representation.
THe guy who said "Democracies fear popular vote" is an knuclehead. Part of the criteria for a democracy to exist is a popular vote. The US is a republic, though I'd rather see it come closer to a democracy than stay back in the 18th century.
But you're misunderstanding the fundamentals of our government. We are not a group of individuals roaming at will. We are individuals tied to states. You can go wherever you want, but eventually to have to declair residency in one state or another. There is the crux, because people in Texas may be for the death penalty while people in Main are not. Why should the voices of Main residents be drown out?
You do have reason to vote even if you "think" your vote doesn't count. This is a prime example of voter apathy and its results:
FYI that's President Harry S Truman
Originally posted by rok
also, i still think it wouldn't be a bad idea to require voting by all citizens. are there pitfalls to that system i am not seeing (aside from some under-informed people just christmas-tree-ing the ballot, which i swear probably happens even today)? edit: i mean, i think the initial system was probably concocted with the optimism that everyone would vote. but unfortunately, we don't get anywhere near that. maybe if everyone just voted, the system would work the way it's supposed to???
I have mixed feelings about this. To do this the government would have to hold elections in such a manner as to not interfear with careers. It tough to do. Secondly, you'd be removing the "RIGHT" to obstain in protest which is a form of free and protected speech. Also, forcing someone to vote does not make them a more informed voter...
But it does force civic responsability in the end doesn't it.
Originally posted by faust9
Why should the voices of Main residents be drown out?
2 senators, multiple district reps.
Drowned out my ass.
Originally posted by faust9
I have mixed feelings about this. To do this the government would have to hold elections in such a manner as to not interfear with careers. It tough to do. Secondly, you'd be removing the "RIGHT" to obstain in protest which is a form of free and protected speech. Also, forcing someone to vote does not make them a more informed voter...
But it does force civic responsability in the end doesn't it.
hmmm... good points. i always thought, though, that election days should be national or state holidays (or paid leave for half-days or something). that should take care of the career issue.
also, to fix the "abstain from voting as a choice" argument, that could also "be a vote." in other words, a vote saying "i don't like anyone, but thanks for the few hours off from work." the point is to get them to the voting booths. i am sure most people would vote, but many flat out don't even show up because they're tired after work, or have other stuff to do, etc. etc.
basically, anything we CAN do to fix the problem higher up to see if that helps the system. i'm kinda seeing if the problems in the electoral system aren't just symptoms to a slowly apathetic voting body.
edit: p.s. i don't see much that can easily help informing the voting public, but one step at a time. right now, our system totally benefits the popularity model, where quantity of ads can get you more votes than sheer ability (or in arnold's case in california, a few multi-million dollar movies and your face in every blockbuster).
Originally posted by Splinemodel
You are really misunderstanding the concept. In a popular vote system, everyone's vote counts the same. So even though maine's population is lower than Texas's, a Maine resident and a Texas resident have the same impact on the overall election. Right now, in Jersey, my vote is worth NOTHING. That's pitiful. I have no reason to vote at all.
No taxation without representation.
The guy who said "Democracies fear popular vote" is an knuclehead. Part of the criteria for a democracy to exist is a popular vote. The US is a republic, though I'd rather see it come closer to a democracy than stay back in the 18th century.
Why is your vote worth nothing? Because your guy lost? He didn't lose because of the Electoral College, he lost because not enough of your state's fellow residents 1: know about him and his stance on issues, 2: cared enough to vote at all 3: felt he was the right person for the job.
If the person you want doesn't win your state, tough titties, as my mom would say.
Seriously, did you make financial contributions to your guy's campaign? Did you go out and volunteer for his/her campaign? Did you make a website or post your opinion on local forums to spread the word? If all you did was stroll into the polling center at the last minute and pulled a lever or punched chad in the face, then no one is to blame for them losing except yourself, fellow believers, and the candidate and his blandness. (Not talking about Gore BTW
When my guy loses (he did) you can throw that right back at me and I'll take it.
We simply have to not only become better citizens/voters but also better losers.
The old expression isn't "If I didn't win, it's broken, let's fix it"...