Is It Time To Reconsider Voting Rights Yet?

[psionl0]

Maybe the runner-up should be VP.

That's the way it used to be prior to the 12th amendment.

While it might give me some more laughs to see Donald and Hilary trying to work together, I think it might be best if the president and the vice president are on the same side.

 

[Belz...]

That's the way it used to be prior to the 12th amendment.

Yes, I'm aware of that.

While it might give me some more laughs to see Donald and Hilary trying to work together, I think it might be best if the president and the vice president are on the same side.

Why?

 

[JoeMorgue]

I think it might be best if the president and the vice president are on the same side.

The fact that the politicians have "sides" (that aren't "The country") is the problem.

The original idea of elected Presidents and Vice Presidents was based on the... optimistic let's say... hope that patriotism would win over politics which lasted a glorious .12 fantoseconds.

 

[jimbob]

I am against. Democracy is for all people, or none. If the people elects someone not well qualified, then so be it.

What must be done (and is done) is to limit the power of those elected, so there is a limit to the damage they can do.

Also, the population should be educated as much as possible in subjects that will help them make reasonable choices. The media have a great mission here.

hans

Yes,

I have a great idea... maybe there could be a literacy test so that only those with at least a fifth grade education would be able to vote.

http://www.openculture.com/2014/07/literacy-test-louisiana-used-to-suppress-the-black-vote.html

 

[jimbob]

Yes,

I have a great idea... maybe there could be a literacy test so that only those with at least a fifth grade education would be able to vote.

http://www.openculture.com/2014/07/literacy-test-louisiana-used-to-suppress-the-black-vote.html

This does highlight the problem with any such system. The gatekeepers have a lot of power and potentially the incentive to abuse it.

 

[The Big Dog]

The answer to this problem is both surprisingly simple to state, yet nearly impossible to achieve.

Educate the citizenry more effectively.

Were Hillary to have lost to Pence, Ryan, Cotton, whomever -- it would have likely been due to a difference in political ideology. However, this election was between an idiot and a serious politician (warts and all). Educated people simply couldn't look at Trump and think he was an appropriate choice.

On another note, the electoral college also failed us. They were established, according to my understanding, to be a check against a dangerous cult-of-personality type.

Considering that the Democrats have been reaping the windfall of the uneducated urban poor for decades, while the urban poor has fallen farther behind, that sounds like an awesome idea.

 

[Bob001]

Out of interest, I calculated what the make-up of the electoral college would be if proportional allocation had been used in each state.

The results:

Trump|265
Clinton|259
Johnson|11
McMullen|1
Stein|2

Trump would have needed an extra 5 EC votes to get elected and Clinton would have needed 11. (Otherwise, it's off to the House of Reps).

ETA Here is a breakdown by state:

|TRUMP|CLINTON|JOHNSON|STEIN|MCMULLIN|TOTAL
Alabama|6|3||||9
Alaska|2|1||||3
Arizona|5|5|1|||11
Arkansas|4|2||||6
California|18|34|2|1||55
Colorado|4|4|1| ||9
Connecticut|3|4||||7
DC||3||||3
Delaware|1|2||||3
Florida|14|14|1|||29
Georgia|8|7|1|||16
Hawaii|1|3||||4
Idaho|3|1||||4
Illinois|8|11|1|||20
Indiana|6|4|1|||11
Iowa|3|3||||6
Kansas|4|2||||6
Kentucky|5|3||||8
Louisiana|5|3||||8
Maine|2|2||||4
Maryland|6|4||||10
Massachusetts|7|4||||11
michigan|8|8||||16
Minnesota|5|5||||10
Mississippi|4|2||||6
Missouri|6|4||||10
Montana|2|1||||3
"N. Carolina"|8|7||||15
Nebraska|3|2||||5
Nevada|3|3||||6
"New Hampsh-"|2|2||||4
"New Jersey"|6|8||||14
New Mexico|2|2|1|||5
New york|11|17||1||29
"North Dakota"|2|1||||3
Ohio|9|9||||18
Oklahoma|5|2||||7
Oregon|3|4||||7
Pennsylvania|10|10||||20
"Rhode Island"|2|2||||4
"S. Carolina"|5|4||||9
"South Dakota"|2|1||||3
Tennessee|7|4||||11
Texas|20|17|1|||38
Utah|3|2|||1|6
Vermont|1|2||||3
Virginia|6|7||||13
Washington|5|6|1|||12
"West Virginia"|3|2||||5
Wisconsin|5|5||||10
Wyoming|2|1||||3
TOTAL|265|259|11|2|1|538

That's interesting. It must have taken a lot of work. But in a proportional system, all candidates would know that every vote mattered. So Clinton might have spent more time in Oklahoma and Texas, and Trump might have spent more in California and New York. The outcome might have been quite different. Or they could have balanced each other and ended up the same.

 

[psionl0]

Why?

Because the VP is not the equivalent of leader of the opposition. They are part of the presidential team. Any opposition to the president should come from congress and not from within his own ranks.

But mostly because the thought of Hillary Clinton under Donald Trump makes me nauseous.

 

[Belz...]

Because the VP is not the equivalent of leader of the opposition. They are part of the presidential team. Any opposition to the president should come from congress and not from within his own ranks.

Yes but I still don't know why you think it should be like this. Having a second in command in the executive branch who acts as a foil to the president sounds like a good idea to me.

 

[psionl0]

That's interesting. It must have taken a lot of work. But in a proportional system, all candidates would know that every vote mattered. So Clinton might have spent more time in Oklahoma and Texas, and Trump might have spent more in California and New York. The outcome might have been quite different. Or they could have balanced each other and ended up the same.

Yes, a different system may have resulted in different campaigning. But I think the more interesting aspect of this exercise is that it would mean that more often than not, the EC would have to be more than just a rubber stamp. They would have to do some work (unless they just hand it over to the House of reps).

At least, that is likely to be the case if the system continues to turn up such unsavory candidates.

 

[psionl0]

Yes but I still don't know why you think it should be like this. Having a second in command in the executive branch who acts as a foil to the president sounds like a good idea to me.

Does Canada have members of the opposition in the ministry?

 

[Belz...]

Does Canada have members of the opposition in the ministry?

The ministry? You mean the cabinet? No, because those are picked by the PM.

Note that although I prefer the parliamentary system to the US presidential one, it doesn't mean that I think Canada's system is all good or couldn't be significantly improved. I dislike the idea of political parties themselves, for instance.

 

[psionl0]

I dislike the idea of political parties themselves, for instance.

I'm not enamored with them myself. However, the alternative is worse. At least with political parties, you know in broad strokes what the basic party platform is and have an idea of what your candidate would do if they can.

With independents, you never know. They are often "single issue" candidates so you have no idea about what else they would be up to. Even if elected, they often abandon their prime platform and leave a bad taste in your mouth.

Local government where I live has candidates who don't profess to belong to a party. Their campaigns are often bland and meaningless and consist of statements such as "I will support the local community" (blah blah blah). Maybe it's deliberate. I doubt that it would be in their interests for a large section of the community to vote which would open them up to greater scrutiny.

 

[theprestige]

How would you put a stop to political parties, without infringing on the right of association, and the right of speech?

 

[NoahFence]

How would you put a stop to political parties, without infringing on the right of association, and the right of speech?

You wouldn't.

 

[casebro]

Do you folks know that internet advertisers aimed political ads at you based on the net knowledge of you? IE, Google searches showed your politics, and ads were aimed at you- from either side. Including fake news clickbaits,, attempting to change your vote. There is a name for it, didn't remember it. It's SOP for selling widgets, why not politics?

That is from my BIL, who is into computers at the philosophical level. So, not CT.

eta: And never a "this ad paid for by the committee to **** with your vote".

 

[Belz...]

How would you put a stop to political parties, without infringing on the right of association, and the right of speech?

That's an obvious problem of the proposition. However the objective is that I'd rather we voted for an actual representative in parliament rather than for the party itself, making that representative, and by extention his or her district, largely irrelevant.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Apparently fascism (like communism) was originally seen as a natural evolution of--and improvement over--liberal democracy. This was before the NSDAP ruined it for everybody with their racism and violent expansionism, of course.

So maybe it's time to reclaim fascism? Nationalizing of all major industry. Overcoming class differences by celebrating national unity. Encouraging assimilation of immigrants. Thanks to Hitler, fascism was never really given a chance. We know how communism turned out, but we should consider giving fascism another try.

No.

Hans