New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Compromise: Keep the Electoral College and get rid of winner take all in awarding electoral votes.

Spamature

President
I agree with the caveat that elections be on only one day, require voter id that verifies citizenship, and be cast on paper ballots.
If the voting districts are drawn by impartial panels instead of politicians, and we all vote under the exact same rules, then you have a deal.
 
No, these commissioners were selected. I want the commissioners elected directly by the voters and I want NO court jurisdiction on the final results.

And now I must add I want the algorithms by which they draw the boundaries also to be put up for a vote by all voters on a line item basis and again NO court jurisdiction on the final results of a fair vote.

You agree and we indeed do have a deal.
 

Spamature

President
No, these commissioners were selected. I want the commissioners elected directly by the voters and I want NO court jurisdiction on the final results.

And now I must add I want the algorithms by which they draw the boundaries also to be put up for a vote by all voters on a line item basis and again NO court jurisdiction on the final results of a fair vote.

You agree and we indeed do have a deal.
That would undo the intent. If voter elect them they by default they will be partisan. Also, they may not be as adept as others who get voted into office. Moreover, if the state is very lopsided in regard to voters in each party, then you have the voters undoing any effort toward fairness in elections in the legislator races along with the executive race. Because voters are not looking for impartial electors. They want electors that will give an advantage to their preferred party.
 
That would undo the intent. If voter elect them they by default they will be partisan.
Do you really think that voting (i.e. democracy) for representation on a commission is MORE partisan than individuals selected by party affiliation by politicians? Yeah, no.

Also, they may not be as adept as others who get voted into office. Moreover, if the state is very lopsided in regard to voters in each party, then you have the voters undoing any effort toward fairness in elections in the legislator races along with the executive race.
Have commision seats assigned to a party (or no party) but have the people vote for who fills those commission seats. Get rid of back room deals. As a matter of fact communications between elected officials and commissioners could be made illegal.

Because voters are not looking for impartial electors. They want electors that will give an advantage to their preferred party.
I want the district drawing algorithms voted on and made public. I want courts relegated to less than observer status.
 

write on

Governor
Gerrymandering is how the states control their House of Representatives elections...not the presidential election.
Yes, and what is the end result? It causes gridlock in Congress-along with the filibuster and them being able to disenfranchise voters.
 

Spamature

President
Do you really think that voting (i.e. democracy) for representation on a commission is MORE partisan than individuals selected by party affiliation by politicians? Yeah, no.
Of course they would be because voting itself is a partisan act. You are not going to reach a non-partisan result by starting off with a partisan act.
Have commision seats assigned to a party (or no party) but have the people vote for who fills those commission seats. Get rid of back room deals. As a matter of fact communications between elected officials and commissioners could be made illegal.
People what someone who is going to fight for their side, not someone who is adept at making concessions on their behalf. It's better that we have people who don't care how it ends up, only that it ends up equatable.


I want the district drawing algorithms voted on and made public. I want courts relegated to less than observer status.
Sure. But you will just end up with conspiracy theorist who prey upon people lack of knowledge of that just like they prey upon the public's lack of knowledge about medicine in this pandemic.
 
Of course they would be because voting itself is a partisan act. You are not going to reach a non-partisan result by starting off with a partisan act.
Democracy is NOT a partisan act. Voting is NOT a partisan act. But even if you think so it is far less partisan than politicians SELECTING commission members. Partisanship is most effective outside of a voting regimen.

It's better that we have people who don't care how it ends up, only that it ends up equatable.
More likely to happen when commissioners are voted for and NOT selected.

Sure. But you will just end up with conspiracy theorist who prey upon people lack of knowledge of that just like they prey upon the public's lack of knowledge about medicine in this pandemic.
I don't see the analogy.
 
Last edited:

Spamature

President
Democracy is NOT a partisan act. Voting is NOT a partisan act. But even if you think so it is far less partisan than politicians SELECTING commission members. Partisanship is most effective outside of a voting regimen.


More likely to happen when commissioners are voted for and NOT selected.


I don't see the analogy.
Voting is THE PARTISAN act that begets all other forms of partisanship. We are literally picking a side to support and\or to oppose when we vote.

It's the whole point of voting. Picking someone who supports the side you are on or opposes the side you are against.


It's not an analogy. That is exactly what would happen if the results did not please a particular side.

It is best to take this part of politics out of the political arena.
 

condorkristy

Mostly Liberal
Has the Electoral College served us well? I think so. But I think it is time to modify it to include getting a plurality of the popular vote as well so that the candidate who gets more votes than anyone else is the President-Elect.
 
Voting is THE PARTISAN act that begets all other forms of partisanship. We are literally picking a side to support and\or to oppose when we vote.
Partisanship comes from having parties that can create stronger than ordinary support for a party or person. There are many, many people called independents who vote not on the basis of partisanship, right? Voting itself is NOT partisan because then they would call it partisaning and not voting.

It's the whole point of voting. Picking someone who supports the side you are on or opposes the side you are against.
Interesting world that you live in but the definitions are just yours. They aren't shared by the common reality of the rest of us I don't think.

It's not an analogy. That is exactly what would happen if the results did not please a particular side.
What is that again? What would happen?

It is best to take this part of politics out of the political arena.
No. I don't want the people who draw up the boundaries of districts to be selected. I want them elected. Your idea would be to send us back from democracy and back to the time when state legislatures selected the state's Federal Senator directly and was not voted in by the people. As much as possible should be subject to election. The days of selection went away with the loss of the Christian faith in this country.
 
Top