Weighting Rural Votes?/Election Reform

[Ghost Land]

I would have that this would get more discussion considering how passionate people are about this.

It did get quite a bit of discussion, much of it being rather heated, but then the thread died a natural death. Would you like people to continue debating this topic to no end?

And for the record, my position is that the whole notion of representative "democracy" is ridiculous in and of itself. To simplify things, you have a few candidates who are trying to sell themselves to the voters, by making promises they have no intent of keeping and oftentimes by slandering the other candidate. Once the guy gets in, he is under no obligation to fulfill his campaign promises, as now he is in power and he can do as he wishes, and he has to contend with another equally crooked body known as Congress, who arguably has even more collective power than the president. Congress has no limit as to the number of terms someone can serve, so in many cases we have the same corrupt person stinking up their place in the Senate or House of Representatives (silly name, by the way, as the government clearly doesn't represent anyone other than itself) for literally several decades, staying in office well into old age.

And you're telling me this highly corrupt and screwed-up system is preferable to a benevolent autocrat who takes his time to figure out what the people want and what is best for the country as a whole, holding frequent referendums and using their results to influence his decisions?

[Doing it Rightland]

I would have that this would get more discussion considering how passionate people are about this.

I don’t really know how much of those moves anyone can disagree with. All those policies are a good step in the right direction. People who have the right to vote shouldn’t just be blocked because there’s an arbitrary cut off date. As long as they filter through the votes afterwards so as to avoid any discrepancies, all that sounds good to me.

[San Lumen]

I would have that this would get more discussion considering how passionate people are about this.

I don’t really know how much of those moves anyone can disagree with. All those policies are a good step in the right direction. People who have the right to vote shouldn’t just be blocked because there’s an arbitrary cut off date. As long as they filter through the votes afterwards so as to avoid any discrepancies, all that sounds good to me.

What do you mean by cut off date? All valid votes gets counted no matter what.

[Northern Davincia]

I would have that this would get more discussion considering how passionate people are about this.

It did get quite a bit of discussion, much of it being rather heated, but then the thread died a natural death. Would you like people to continue debating this topic to no end?

And for the record, my position is that the whole notion of representative "democracy" is ridiculous in and of itself. To simplify things, you have a few candidates who are trying to sell themselves to the voters, by making promises they have no intent of keeping and oftentimes by slandering the other candidate. Once the guy gets in, he is under no obligation to fulfill his campaign promises, as now he is in power and he can do as he wishes, and he has to contend with another equally crooked body known as Congress, who arguably has even more collective power than the president. Congress has no limit as to the number of terms someone can serve, so in many cases we have the same corrupt person stinking up their place in the Senate or House of Representatives (silly name, by the way, as the government clearly doesn't represent anyone other than itself) for literally several decades, staying in office well into old age.

And you're telling me this highly corrupt and screwed-up system is preferable to a benevolent autocrat who takes his time to figure out what the people want and what is best for the country as a whole, holding frequent referendums and using their results to influence his decisions?

FPTP is what enforces your grievances with representative democracy.

[San Lumen]

It did get quite a bit of discussion, much of it being rather heated, but then the thread died a natural death. Would you like people to continue debating this topic to no end?

And for the record, my position is that the whole notion of representative "democracy" is ridiculous in and of itself. To simplify things, you have a few candidates who are trying to sell themselves to the voters, by making promises they have no intent of keeping and oftentimes by slandering the other candidate. Once the guy gets in, he is under no obligation to fulfill his campaign promises, as now he is in power and he can do as he wishes, and he has to contend with another equally crooked body known as Congress, who arguably has even more collective power than the president. Congress has no limit as to the number of terms someone can serve, so in many cases we have the same corrupt person stinking up their place in the Senate or House of Representatives (silly name, by the way, as the government clearly doesn't represent anyone other than itself) for literally several decades, staying in office well into old age.

And you're telling me this highly corrupt and screwed-up system is preferable to a benevolent autocrat who takes his time to figure out what the people want and what is best for the country as a whole, holding frequent referendums and using their results to influence his decisions?

FPTP is what enforces your grievances with representative democracy.

And its not going to change anytime soon without a referendum.

[Doing it Rightland]

I don’t really know how much of those moves anyone can disagree with. All those policies are a good step in the right direction. People who have the right to vote shouldn’t just be blocked because there’s an arbitrary cut off date. As long as they filter through the votes afterwards so as to avoid any discrepancies, all that sounds good to me.

What do you mean by cut off date? All valid votes gets counted no matter what.

I meant that now in many states, they have voter registration requirements, making it much harder for people who aren't registered to vote to do so. "Block" was a poor choice of words though, I'll give you that.

[Thermodolia]

FPTP is what enforces your grievances with representative democracy.

And its not going to change anytime soon without a referendum.

Oh screw the referendum. We need actual change not some incremental bullshit. We need a whole new constitution

[Kernen]

And its not going to change anytime soon without a referendum.

Oh screw the referendum. We need actual change not some incremental bullshit. We need a whole new constitution

That's a good way to undermine unpopular rights.

[Thermodolia]

Oh screw the referendum. We need actual change not some incremental bullshit. We need a whole new constitution

That's a good way to undermine unpopular rights.

And?

[San Lumen]

What do you mean by cut off date? All valid votes gets counted no matter what.

I meant that now in many states, they have voter registration requirements, making it much harder for people who aren't registered to vote to do so. "Block" was a poor choice of words though, I'll give you that.

What would you change?

And its not going to change anytime soon without a referendum.

Oh screw the referendum. We need actual change not some incremental bullshit. We need a whole new constitution

And how are you going to get this new constitution?

[Thermodolia]

I meant that now in many states, they have voter registration requirements, making it much harder for people who aren't registered to vote to do so. "Block" was a poor choice of words though, I'll give you that.

What would you change?

Oh screw the referendum. We need actual change not some incremental bullshit. We need a whole new constitution

And how are you going to get this new constitution?

Doesn’t matter how. We need a new constitution

[San Lumen]

What would you change?
And how are you going to get this new constitution?

Doesn’t matter how. We need a new constitution

Thats not a answer. How are you going to get it?

[Thermodolia]

Doesn’t matter how. We need a new constitution

Thats not a answer. How are you going to get it?

Yes it is answer. It’s not an answer you like but it is an answer. Stop trying to stifle the debate

[San Lumen]

Thats not a answer. How are you going to get it?

Yes it is answer. It’s not an answer you like but it is an answer. Stop trying to stifle the debate

Im not trying to stifle the debate. id like to know how you think we are going to get this new constitution. Thats not stifling debate. Its a legitimate question

[Thermodolia]

Yes it is answer. It’s not an answer you like but it is an answer. Stop trying to stifle the debate

Im not trying to stifle the debate. id like to know how you think we are going to get this new constitution. Thats not stifling debate. Its a legitimate question

And I said it doesn’t matter how. To which you said that’s not an answer. You only want one answer

[San Lumen]

Im not trying to stifle the debate. id like to know how you think we are going to get this new constitution. Thats not stifling debate. Its a legitimate question

And I said it doesn’t matter how. To which you said that’s not an answer. You only want one answer

And somehow magically we are going to get a perfect constitution whether its by military coup or a constitutional convention neither of which is going to happen.

[Doing it Rightland]

I meant that now in many states, they have voter registration requirements, making it much harder for people who aren't registered to vote to do so. "Block" was a poor choice of words though, I'll give you that.

What would you change?

I would get rid of those requirements. Do what New York did. Same day registration and all. As long as everyone verifies that it's them, then I have no issue with it.

[San Lumen]

What would you change?

I would get rid of those requirements. Do what New York did. Same day registration and all. As long as everyone verifies that it's them, then I have no issue with it.

What New York did ought to be the law in every state

[Ghost Land]

It did get quite a bit of discussion, much of it being rather heated, but then the thread died a natural death. Would you like people to continue debating this topic to no end?

And for the record, my position is that the whole notion of representative "democracy" is ridiculous in and of itself. To simplify things, you have a few candidates who are trying to sell themselves to the voters, by making promises they have no intent of keeping and oftentimes by slandering the other candidate. Once the guy gets in, he is under no obligation to fulfill his campaign promises, as now he is in power and he can do as he wishes, and he has to contend with another equally crooked body known as Congress, who arguably has even more collective power than the president. Congress has no limit as to the number of terms someone can serve, so in many cases we have the same corrupt person stinking up their place in the Senate or House of Representatives (silly name, by the way, as the government clearly doesn't represent anyone other than itself) for literally several decades, staying in office well into old age.

And you're telling me this highly corrupt and screwed-up system is preferable to a benevolent autocrat who takes his time to figure out what the people want and what is best for the country as a whole, holding frequent referendums and using their results to influence his decisions?

FPTP is what enforces your grievances with representative democracy.

FPTP is indeed terrible, though I'm not quite seeing how a proportional system would work in all elections, as you can't slice up one person proportionally. "His head, left arm, and torso are Democrat; his legs, right arm, and butt are Republican." I'm also not a big fan of party politics, either; I feel people should judge candidates on their own merits rather than whether there's a "D" or "R" next to their name.

[San Lumen]

FPTP is what enforces your grievances with representative democracy.

FPTP is indeed terrible, though I'm not quite seeing how a proportional system would work in all elections, as you can't slice up one person proportionally. "His head, left arm, and torso are Democrat; his legs, right arm, and butt are Republican." I'm also not a big fan of party politics, either; I feel people should judge candidates on their own merits rather than whether there's a "D" or "R" next to their name.

First past the post does have issues.

A proportional system doesn’t work in all circumstances and those who support it don’t want to acknowledge it’s flaws. The main one is it being very difficult to get a majority government.

The only way fptp is going to change is by electing people who support reform and then passing a referendum like what Minneapolis, Maine and San Francisco did