ADVERTISEMENT

What Pro-Democracy Changes Would You Like to See for America?

Abolishing the electoral college means you can pander to dc, Chicago, NY, and LA and win the presidency.
Better compromise may be allocation of electoral votes by proportion of share won.
 
My intention is to add a poll to this thread, but not until I've seen what people are suggesting.

There are lots of things we could do to make our democracy better. Some easy enough, some nearly impossible.

Here are a few suggestions to get the ball rolling....

Tighten campaign contribution rules with particular attention to transparency.

Elect the President by popular vote.

Make sure every eligible voter is registered and has a voter ID - coupled with strengthened anti-fraud measures.

Restore a modernized version of the Fairness Doctrine and update the Equal Time rule as needed.

Term limits.

Mandatory voting.
Having scrolled through this, I offer a suggestion. Perhaps group things by subject matter, and several polls.
 
Why did the EU include such a ‘vile compromise’ as to ascribe equal representation among members with vastly different populations?
Why would Estonia demand an equal voice to France instead of 1/49th the representation that their relative population dictates?
What year is it?
@What Would Jesus Do? you‘ve had a bit to ponder why in the 21st century Estonia seeks something as vile as equal representation with France in the EU.

Why would they do that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: dandh
1) Voting should remain strictly voluntary, but passing a mandatory civics exam should be a requirement for voter registration. So many voters out there are woefully ignorant on how a government is run, from all sides of the political spectrum. For instance, folks need to brush up on the Constitution and its amendments, have a basic knowledge of how the legal system works, and be familiar with checks and balances for the 3 major governmental branches.

I get that this is hardly foolproof as this is akin to getting a drivers license (many motorists who passed an exam probably have no business being on the road) but it can shed the misconception that voting is a right (as technically it’s not as it’s neither automatic nor unconditional like say, buying cigarettes or beer at a certain age), but more accurately, privilege and a responsibility.

2) Prohibit politicians (either prospective or elected) from using social media as a means to campaign or further an agenda. I swear, Twitter has given 50 year olds free license to act like 6th graders like nothing I’ve ever seen before. It’s ridiculous.
 
Abolishing the electoral college means you can pander to dc, Chicago, NY, and LA and win the presidency.
Better compromise may be allocation of electoral votes by proportion of share won.
Cities and states don't vote, people do. Because of the electoral college a lot of republicans in blue states and dems in red states just don't vote.... doing away with current system would give us a more accurate barometer of what the people want.

Having candidates try to appeal to the most people possible wherever they live is a good thing. As it stands now Republicans pander to people in rural areas and largely ignore the population centers because they know they don't need a majority... That's messed up

But your compromise would be much better than what we have now. Winner take all is ridiculous
 
  • Like
Reactions: BanjoSaysWoof
Authoritarian people such as yourself want to make things mandatory. This is a pretty twisted view. And your 30% doesn't add up.

Just because you and your ilk want to create a hive mind where the 10-20 largest cities essentially control who is president doesn't mean it should work that way.
Lol.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: your_master5
First thing that needs to be done is get rid of the fvcking electoral college. Second thing I would suggest is put an end to gerrymandering. There’s a million things that need to change but I’d start with these two.
Those are the two big ones.
No! the east and west coast would elect everyone. Flyover country would literally have no say—Ever!!
border.jpg


You mean actual people would elect their government??? How shocking!!
 
Last edited:
Winner take all is ridiculous
Do away with the electoral college and winner take all?

Let’s try it.
Biden president for 187 days of the year, Trump president for 170 days of the year? Still a week to slice up among the minor party candidates…
 
If you hear anyone mention doing away with the electoral college, you know they are anti-American.
 
Why should the people in red be ruled by the people in the middle when there are more of them?
They shouldn’t.
That’s why we have a federal framework for areas of broad consensus, but a state government to handle the ‘local ruling’.

The mistake is thinking we’d be better taking every issue great and small, passing it with the slimmest of margins on the federal level, and thereby imposing it against the will of much of the country.
 
They shouldn’t.
That’s why we have a federal framework for areas of broad consensus, but a state government to handle the ‘local ruling’.

The mistake is thinking we’d be better taking every issue great and small, passing it with the slimmest of margins on the federal level, and thereby imposing it against the will of much of the country.

Might make some sense for some things. The problem is that the country is far more interconnected today then it was in the past.
 
we have states for more localized governance that make sense for that region. The president and federal government represent us all. There’s no goddamn reason to still have the electoral college. None. Funny how it’s typically cons that defend it, hmmm, I wonder why?
Actually, Rs have wanted to abolish the electoral college in my lifetime while Ds thought it was great. Just like trying to make DC a state, or Puerto Rico, people find arguments to suit their need when it's convenient, without a view for the long term.

The electoral college does exactly what it's intended to do, ensure a representative result. Part of living in a representative Republic rather than a staight democracy.
 
They shouldn’t.
That’s why we have a federal framework for areas of broad consensus, but a state government to handle the ‘local ruling’.

The mistake is thinking we’d be better taking every issue great and small, passing it with the slimmest of margins on the federal level, and thereby imposing it against the will of much of the country.
It's not a "consensus" when less than a third of the population has an out-sized influence on the outcome.
 
Fact check all campaign commercials and don't allow any that aren't factual on TV/radio.
I don't trust anyone to do that. Everyone seems to have an agenda. I love the premise, though. I'd like to limit campaign commercials to Sep-Nov too.
 
It's not a "consensus" when less than a third of the population has an out-sized influence on the outcome.
It requires consensus when large states must seek the concurrence of small states.

Why do you think Estonia would seek an equal voice with France in matters before the EU?
 
- Congressional Term limits: I'm even ok with a return after a term is up, but there needs to be at least a 4-year break
- Congressional Age limits: Must retire at 75
- Voter ID - coupled with strengthened anti-fraud measures.
- Campaign Contributions: significantly tighten campaign contribution rules with particular attention to transparency.
- Parties: Abolish the two party system, by incentivizing other parties through equality in funding. Not sure how to accomplish this, but what I really want is to vote on a candidate that best represents my view point on individual issues, no more of this all or nothing, team politic, BS!
- Holiday for Election Day: This would allow for elimination of absentee voting sans a physical/health impairment or military service
- Ads: Limit TV campaign ads to Sep - Election Day
- Debates: Moderators are required to apply 30 sec penalties to candidates who don't answer questions, and instead "mud sling" as a retort.


Mandatory voting.
Are you nuts!? NO!

Australia requires it. [forced voting]
Glad I don't live there, then.

End tax exempt status for any and all churches or “religious” organizations which engage in political activity.
I'm actually okay with this. I can't remember Jesus traveling the land gathering disciples to take on the Roman govt. I want freedom FROM religion so that I can live my personal life based on my personal faith.
 
So does enacting any national voting law increase democracy? I think that's a step backwards

Term limits gets the government back toward where it was founded - a part-time, temporary job
 
  • Like
Reactions: binsfeldcyhawk2
Term limits gets the government back toward where it was founded - a part-time, temporary job
I’m sympathetic to the effort, but I think the real consequence is greater power for the staffers and ‘party machine’.

To me one of the cooler things about Washington was his Cinncinatian example of relinquishing power that every president until FDR respected.
 
Absolutely nothing other than the fact Australia has a higher percentage of their population still alive to vote. That's what 387 deaths per million versus 3116 here will get you.
They have delayed covid, not defeated it. They are also giving up. From this article last fall, here is one example of the Orwellian crap Australia foisted on its people:

Intrastate travel within Australia is also severely restricted. And the government of South Australia, one of the country’s six states, developed and is now testing an app as Orwellian as any in the free world to enforce its quarantine rules. Returning travelers quarantining at home will be forced to download an app that combines facial recognition and geolocation. The state will text them at random times, and thereafter they will have 15 minutes to take a picture of their face in the location where they are supposed to be. Should they fail, the local police department will be sent to follow up in person. “We don’t tell them how often or when, on a random basis they have to reply within 15 minutes,” Premier Steven Marshall explained. “I think every South Australian should feel pretty proud that we are the national pilot for the home-based quarantine app.”

The article also notes:

Australia is undoubtedly a democracy, with multiple political parties, regular elections, and the peaceful transfer of power. But if a country indefinitely forbids its own citizens from leaving its borders, strands tens of thousands of its citizens abroad, puts strict rules on intrastate travel, prohibits citizens from leaving home without an excuse from an official government list, mandates masks even when people are outdoors and socially distanced, deploys the military to enforce those rules, bans protest, and arrests and fines dissenters, is that country still a liberal democracy?

 
But if a country indefinitely forbids its own citizens from leaving its borders, strands tens of thousands of its citizens abroad, puts strict rules on intrastate travel, prohibits citizens from leaving home without an excuse from an official government list, mandates masks even when people are outdoors and socially distanced, deploys the military to enforce those rules, bans protest, and arrests and fines dissenters, is that country still a liberal democracy?
3tftf0.jpg
 
They have delayed covid, not defeated it. They are also giving up. From this article last fall, here is one example of the Orwellian crap Australia foisted on its people:

Intrastate travel within Australia is also severely restricted. And the government of South Australia, one of the country’s six states, developed and is now testing an app as Orwellian as any in the free world to enforce its quarantine rules. Returning travelers quarantining at home will be forced to download an app that combines facial recognition and geolocation. The state will text them at random times, and thereafter they will have 15 minutes to take a picture of their face in the location where they are supposed to be. Should they fail, the local police department will be sent to follow up in person. “We don’t tell them how often or when, on a random basis they have to reply within 15 minutes,” Premier Steven Marshall explained. “I think every South Australian should feel pretty proud that we are the national pilot for the home-based quarantine app.”

The article also notes:

Australia is undoubtedly a democracy, with multiple political parties, regular elections, and the peaceful transfer of power. But if a country indefinitely forbids its own citizens from leaving its borders, strands tens of thousands of its citizens abroad, puts strict rules on intrastate travel, prohibits citizens from leaving home without an excuse from an official government list, mandates masks even when people are outdoors and socially distanced, deploys the military to enforce those rules, bans protest, and arrests and fines dissenters, is that country still a liberal democracy?

387/3116
 
Eliminating the ability of voters to vote themselves other peoples tax money. If you are getting government handouts, you don't get to vote.

‘THE AMERICAN REPUBLIC WILL ENDURE UNTIL THE DAY CONGRESS DISCOVERS THAT IT CAN BRIBE THE PUBLIC WITH THE PUBLIC’S MONEY’?​

 
We just saw one of them last week in WV v EPA. Add curtailing Chevron deference to the future wish list.
 
ADVERTISEMENT