Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would like to see something entirely different where everyone can still vote and know what they are really voting for.
Let's say a voter walks into a voting booth with a kiosk. First thing they choose is several different topics like immigration, foreign policy, etc. Then they are asked a short series of questions on the selected topics in the form of "Candidate A proposes ... and Candidate B proposes ..., with whom do you agree the most?"
You are never given any names of the candidates but you know exactly what issues you are concerned the most about and choose a "mystery candidate" that best matches your ideals.
Rather than that, I still prefer what I mentioned earlier - binding resolutions on key issues. I think we have gone too far in being a representative democracy and our representatives have far too much autonomy. They should be puppets of the people, but too often it is corps and special interests pulling the strings (I always take the bull by the hand and don't mix metaphors ). They can say one thing and do something completely different once in office.
I would like to see something entirely different where everyone can still vote and know what they are really voting for.
Let's say a voter walks into a voting booth with a kiosk. First thing they choose is several different topics like immigration, foreign policy, etc. Then they are asked a short series of questions on the selected topics in the form of "Candidate A proposes ... and Candidate B proposes ..., with whom do you agree the most?"
You are never given any names of the candidates but you know exactly what issues you are concerned the most about and choose a "mystery candidate" that best matches your ideals.
doesn't sound very democratic-almost as though only the elite well educated could vote- Hhhmmm
If I remember correctly some ballots were soooooo long last voting season- that took forever to get in and out of there- personally put it all on the internet -- but with our hacking friends- Kenny in South Park be the next prez.
Should people have to demonstrate understanding of where candidates stand on the issues before being allowed to vote?
There would be very few people eligible to vote then because
1) Many times it is hard to know where a candidate truly stands if you try to be educated
2) Many people do not have the time to really know
3) Many people don't really care. Maybe they should not be allowed to vote but how do you determine who these people are? And who is going to determine it
ETA: Voting on spending bills and referendums is even worse. There were a few bond issues on the ballot where I live and even as an accountant I could not make heads or tails of them.
I would like to see something entirely different where everyone can still vote and know what they are really voting for.
Let's say a voter walks into a voting booth with a kiosk. First thing they choose is several different topics like immigration, foreign policy, etc. Then they are asked a short series of questions on the selected topics in the form of "Candidate A proposes ... and Candidate B proposes ..., with whom do you agree the most?"
Seems like an easy way to manipulate votes to me. Ever read a Voter's Pamphlet? They all believe in education, employment, fairness...
Even though the answer should be yes, I say no and here's why:
1. People can have babies without financial stability.
2. People can get married without premarital counseling.
Too many people get married for stupid reasons. MANY people (particularly women) have admitted to getting married for the wrong reasons (thinking marriage will help or that a baby will improve the relationship).
You have to realize that the majority of folks out there don't have brain power to rub two nickels together, let alone raise a child, be a wonderful partner, vote, operate a vehicle, etc. Look at how many people out there take out their pain on others? In my opinion, those people are incompetent and lack emotional intelligence.
No, that is up to the voters themselves. I think candidates' positions should be absolutely clear, but voters should not have to take a test or prove in any way if they truly understand the candidates' position.
The main problem that I see is the "get out and vote" campaigns. Those on the left and on the right who are passionate about the issues and who are informed will go to vote no matter what. But the media and the government pushes the message that everyone needs to go out and vote. This, in turn, drives a lot of people to the polls who are not knowledgeable of the issues and simply vote for a candidate based on their looks, personality, race, last name, party, etc....
Should the candidates be required to do what's in the best interest of the voters? The only way voters can know what they need to know is only if they have the same information that the candidate has.
Anyway with all the fooling around with voters that is already going on who can be trusted to developers requirements? So Na leave voting the way it is.
Our government was designed a long time ago to keep the hands of the uneducated riff-raff well away from the actual levers of power. Given the results of polls and surveys today, it's pretty easy to see why. Meanwhile, the job of lawmakers is to represent the interests of constituents, not their silly opinions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
). They can say one thing and do something completely different once in office.
