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.
Right now we have winner take all in congressional elections. Would you like something more like the parliamentary system, where if 40% voted Republican 30% voted Democrat 20% voted Libertarian 10% voted Socialist. That would make congress 40% Republican and so on until 10% of the seats were Socialist. I have mixed feelings because I doubt that system would work in a large Federalist system like the US, but I like the idea that 10% of the voters get 10% of the power rather than 10% get 0% of the power.
I think you would still have to base it on individual district elections... otherwise who chooses which representatives are chosen?
We largely choose candidates, not necessarily blind parties. Often the goes along party lines, but sometimes it doesn't.
If in a national election we chose only political parties and not candidates, who'd decide which politicians were appointed seats? There's a big difference between moderates and outliers on many issues.
I'd like to reinstate Article II, Sec. 1, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution which said that each member of the Electoral College voted twice for President. The winner became President, the runner-up became the Vice-President. Then, the 12th Amendment replaced it, making one separate vote for each office. It was said that the 1st and 2nd place winners argued all the time, but a non-partisan election like that couldn't be any worse than what I see now. As it is now, the President chooses a running mate that nobody would ever want as President, so nobody will shoot him.
I favor abolishing the Electoral College altogether and letting the popular vote be the only deciding factor. The EC seems unnecessary and a waste of time at this point.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,360 posts, read 54,566,103 times
Reputation: 40826
No, I want to vote for an individual, not a party. I'd much rather vote for someone I believe I can trust, even if our views are different, than some weasel who'll agree to anything to get elected.
No, I want to vote for an individual, not a party. I'd much rather vote for someone I believe I can trust, even if our views are different, than some weasel who'll agree to anything to get elected.
I'm fine with the representational process done as currently structured.
With the massive expansion of total population, I have more of a problem with the ratio of citizens to Congress representatives. It would seem to me to be a good idea to expand this to 1000 representatives. Might make the representatives a little more in touch with voter sentiments.
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.
