|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
216.154.34.118
In Reply to: RE: Another post-election analysis - anyone else seen it? posted by Chris from Lafayette on November 22, 2020 at 00:47:01
the existing bi-partisan system would have to be tossed.
... but i suspect that won't happen ... decay, then dissolution seem on the horizon
Follow Ups:
Ab Esse Ad Posse Valet Fellatio
Super lucky to be born in Canada.Don't worry the USA did well - and interestingly so did China.
Edits: 11/23/20 11/23/20
My perception, anyway. Must be the cold winters.
Edits: 11/22/20
...in the fact that the people who would have to fix the problems to make the electoral system completely fair and representative of the population are the same people who have a personal interest in keeping things exactly the way they are. I see zero likelihood of real change coming anytime soon.
The term "term limits" springs to mind.
;)
You have a point. California is up for 'redistricting' But we can't afford to have any FEWER 'safe disctricts' for Democrats. So nothing fundamental will change.
My solution?
Put a COMPUTER on it. Draw minimum length borders of EQUAL population. Let the political chips fall where they may.
If you don't believe me? Check out the CA districs map......
Too much is never enough
Actually, I agree with you. Put an end to gerrymandering and vote suppression. Require an equal ratio of polling places to the number of registered voters so nobody is waiting in line for an hour (or longer) to vote. And, as you put it, let the chips fall where they may.
I don't understand why we can't simply vote online. If it's secure enough for banking and controlling your investments, it's secure enough to vote.
One MINOR but maybe important point.
Hackers are typically individuals with the exception of SOME state-supported activities. I won't mention the Asian Country implicated in much of this, but I suspect you already know.
As the stakes RISE, the incentive also rises. We are talking essential influence if not outright control of the largest economy on Earth. California is Top-Ten economies were is taken as its own item. Maybe even part of the Top-Five? I don't have latest data.
But THAT is the incentive for voter fraud and supporession. I'm really GLAD that this election in the US featured North of 150 million votes. Maybe 20 million MORE than in 2016?
I'd say it SHOULD be possible to vote online. It SHOULD be. But will it ever be? Most persons have miserable password managment habits. Some write 'em down and put 'em on the refrigerator door.
A FEW unlukcy types in this country have little or NO access to internet let alone a 'secure' connection.
I'd say voting online with 99.9% security is still maybe a decade away.
Talk about voter suppression? What incentive do California Republicans have to vote? Virtually all of the states 55 or so Electoral votes go Dem. Make a proportional outcome? As it is, California is about 20% of the total needed for election.
That's the kind of stuff needing a fix, at the national level.
Too much is never enough
...it's the other way around. From my perspective, gerrymandering is wrong regardless of which side it benefits, as is vote suppression, and we saw a whole lot of attempts at that this last election.
At this point, I'm pretty thoroughly disgusted by both parties, and certainly would not choose to vote for either if a viable alternative existed.
If you had the impression I favored ONE party of another, you're wrong.
California ia a terrific example of a one-party state and should be taught as an example of what happens when one party is basiically 'in charge'.
It is possible that a Computer Program could straighten out the boundaries and yield a MINIMUM border length solution with equal populations.
Getting everyone to buy into such a solution, is of course, dreaming.
Too much is never enough
I had in fact been under that impression, and am quite glad to be corrected.
As I said before, the same situation exists in Wisconsin but with the situation reversed. The stupidity I see here in the interest of party prejudices is beyond description, and I would agree wholeheartedly with your proposition to use a computer to redraw lines devoid of gerrymandering considerations, provided an even ratio of polling places to the number of registered voters was maintained.
There's only one way it will change, and that's if the populace gets so fed up that they vote out the people that are feeding the fires of polarization for their own political purposes. Unfortunately, I don't see much likelihood of that happening. Far too many people are too easily manipulated for that to happen, and I see the evidence of it all the time.
I wish I could point to a time or place where 'things' started coming off the rails.Most poepole don't know that ORIGINALLY the President was the single person (NO TICKET) who got the greatest number of electoral votes. The VP was the 2nd vote getter. At that time? You'd have several viable candidates for President.
The 12th amendment, ratified in 1804 changed that and made the Presidential Election a 2-fer.
Is the President ProTem of the Senate THAT important? He only votes as a tie-breaker.
The REAL purpose of the 2-fer would be to SET UP the VP to be the next president, thus confirming That Party in power for another term or 2.....As long as the governement spends OPM (other peoples money) change will be tough to come by.
NOBODY will answer from memory or without looking up the 8th and 10th amendments. That is key to understanding just how messed upstuff actually IS.
Much law fails that test except thru the most arcane legal convolutions.I LIKE the idea of somehow keeping the number of places to vote in proportion to the number of voters. Nothing worse than getting off work THAN standing in line 45 minutes......And still be a 30 minute drive from the house!
Too much is never enough
Edits: 11/22/20 11/22/20
The emerging consensus on the Court is that only state legislatures have the authority to draw districts and if they draw them based on partisan politics, well that's tough shitski.
The problem is not that there is evil in the world, the problem is that there is good. Because otherwise, who would care?
Agreed.
It is a STATE ISSUE.
Anybody HERE have any idea of the content of the 9th and 10th Amendments? NO PEEKING! Didn't think so.
Anyway, A draconian and non-starter solution would be the same as the number of members of the Supreme Court....
That is to say? A Constitutional Amendmenet.
Too much is never enough
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: