1 year community serviceWhat would be the penalty for abstaining?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
1 year community serviceWhat would be the penalty for abstaining?
It also treated its citizens like sh!t during covid lockdowns. Not a very free country at all.Australia requires it.
Haha. What does that have to do with voting? This is hilarious.It also treated its citizens like sh!t during covid lockdowns. Not a very free country at all.
Having scrolled through this, I offer a suggestion. Perhaps group things by subject matter, and several polls.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.
@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 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?
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.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.
Lol.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.
Those are the two big ones.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.
No! the east and west coast would elect everyone. Flyover country would literally have no say—Ever!!
Do away with the electoral college and winner take all?Winner take all is ridiculous
Do you think that the people in the middle want to be ruled by the people in the red?Those are the two big ones.
You mean actual people would elect their government??? How shocking!!
It also treated its citizens like sh!t during covid lockdowns. Not a very free country at all.
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.Haha. What does that have to do with voting? This is hilarious.
Do you think that the people in the middle want to be ruled by the people in the red?
But you believe the opposite of that is fair?Do you think that the people in the middle want to be ruled by the people in the red?
Do you think the vastly, hugely higher numbers of those on the coasts want to be ruled by the very, very few in the middle?Do you think that the people in the middle want to be ruled by the people in the red?
They shouldn’t.Why should the people in red be ruled by the people in the middle when there are more of them?
Do you believe the ‘opposite of that’ is the only alternative to that?But you believe the opposite of that is fair?
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.
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.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?
Not really, but then again I live in the in between and don't give two shits about adjusting my life to suit the coastal populace.But you believe the opposite of that is fair?
It's not a "consensus" when less than a third of the population has an out-sized influence on the outcome.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.
No but any alteration to the EC is met with resistance from those who have benefitted from the current system. Such as....Do you believe the ‘opposite of that’ is the only alternative to that?
Not really, but then again I live in the in between and don't give two shits about adjusting my life to suit the coastal populace.
Unapologetic resistance to boot.No but any alteration to the EC is met with resistance from those who have benefitted from the current system. Such as....
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.Fact check all campaign commercials and don't allow any that aren't factual on TV/radio.
It requires consensus when large states must seek the concurrence of small states.It's not a "consensus" when less than a third of the population has an out-sized influence on the outcome.
Are you nuts!? NO!Mandatory voting.
Glad I don't live there, then.Australia requires it. [forced voting]
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.End tax exempt status for any and all churches or “religious” organizations which engage in political activity.
I’m sympathetic to the effort, but I think the real consequence is greater power for the staffers and ‘party machine’.Term limits gets the government back toward where it was founded - a part-time, temporary job
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: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.
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?
387/3116They 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?
Australia Traded Away Too Much Liberty
How long can a democracy maintain emergency restrictions and still call itself a free country?www.theatlantic.com