How you are being robbed of your right to vote fairly

Discussion in 'Elections & Campaigns' started by LafayetteBis, Sep 27, 2018.

  1. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Finally, something concrete that can be addressed:

    (1) Nothing can be done in the "selection" of judges nominated to the Supreme Court. Only the PotUS can propose candidates to the Senate for approval under current law. Which is how the Replicants can "pack" the Supreme Court.

    So, what Americans must understand is that the only way to change the present situation is to pass a law that diminishes the tenure of Supreme Court judges from a life-terms to one of ten or fifteen years. With which the PotUS is then responsible for nominating candidates to renew the SC. But, either body (the HofR or the Senate) can also nominate candidates for the SC!

    (In fact, any citizen should be able to nominate a candidate to the Supreme Court. Of course, that would require a background check by authorities for admittance to the open selection.)

    The Senate vote must remain the sole arbiter nonetheless. So, Americans had better THINK before they vote their senatorial candidates!


    Meaning what? That we, the sheeple, must remember that when we elect a PotUS, our selection will likely nominate candidates to the SC that are of his/her political thinking.

    (2) In order to be only "somewhat political", politicians need to be completely independent of political contributions from "interested parties". (This is how they have been corrupted in the past beholden to there "benefactors".)

    Which means further that All Americans should be able to contribute a Maximum Amount to their candidate. (Say $10K). AND NO MORE. (Only citizens may contribute their own funds to elect a candidate.)

    So, who pays for the massive meetings and TV-commercials? That budget too can be fixed, but for the most part the candidates must come to the people, and not the reverse. And that means, TV must be obliged to offer Prime Time coverage of TV-debates of candidates (to keep their license to transmit) - free, gratis and for nothing! Meaning both local and national.

    (3) I can add nothing. Well done!

    (Except this: For ours to be an Acceptable Democracy those elected to ANY POLITICAL OFFICE IN THE LAND MUST BE DONE SO BY MEANS OF PURELY A POPULAR VOTE. The state Electoral College
    can be relegated the duty solely of reporting the popular-vote results to the HofR as they were collected.)
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2018
  2. Seth Bullock

    Seth Bullock Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2015
    Messages:
    13,625
    Likes Received:
    11,934
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And this, of course, is where we've gone wrong. The best SC justice has no political thinking. Think that's impossible? It isn't, if you find justices who fully understand and support their role in government. Politics should play out in Congress. By contrast, personal politics should be fully suppressed by a SC justice. When a SC justice goes to work, they should leave their personal politics at home.



    When I said the president should be "somewhat political", I meant that, yes, the President should engage the politics of the day, but mostly as a cheerleader or persuader. Other than the one vote the Vice President has in the event of a tie in a Senate vote, the President's job is primarily to preside over the bureaucracy that executes the laws that Congress passes. That's his role, and that role isn't political. So ... "somewhat" political.

    On campaign finance, we pretty much agree. I would lower that $10k number to $1k, thereby putting middle class and low income people on the same footing as wealthy people as far as how much they can contribute.



    Thanks.

    I prefer the EC system. It makes it more likely that the winner will be the one who is most broadly preferred across the country, from coast to coast. I don't want the presidency decided by a handful of major cities. I think this is where we'll have to leave the EC discussion because we've hashed it over pretty good, and we've reached an impasse.

    But we also discussed districting for the House. I hope I have given you some things to think about on that. I have tried to use facts, numbers, and examples. I have shown that, without districting, millions of voters would be disenfranchised of their representation, and the big cities would rule the House.

    This may seem attractive if you believe your side would come out the winner in that situation, but I think it is patently un-American. Our present system gives voice to many across the country, not simply a few big population centers.

    Seth
     
  3. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Only if it translates the pure popular-vote to the HofR. The states should not even be handling the voting process, and if the US had a National Identity Card system (as most other developed countries do have) then the states would be unnecessary in the procedure. One should be able to enter any voting-place in a presidential election, show their National Identity Card, and have their vote registered. (Not the content of the vote, but only that the person voted.)

    The election of a PotUS is national not regional in nature ... !
     
  4. Crawdadr

    Crawdadr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    7,293
    Likes Received:
    1,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What is the incentive for the states to give up more sovereignty to the Federal government? Why should I want the voice of my states citizens to be lessened in order to have your version of a pure popular vote?
     
  5. Antiduopolist

    Antiduopolist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2016
    Messages:
    24,354
    Likes Received:
    10,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Voting is an utter joke, so this pseudo-issue is completely irrelevant.

    The system is so massively corrupt that no one's vote matters except on occasional superficial issues of childish personal freedoms like the right to get dumber and higher with pot AND alcohol, or only alcohol.

    This country has always been controlled by the aristocracy; the People are given only the pathetic illusion of choice.
     
  6. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is sick and sad commentary on human intellect.
     
  7. Steady Pie

    Steady Pie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    24,506
    Likes Received:
    7,247
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    All majoritarian countries have a procedure for appointing heads of state that mirrors the electoral college in function. They do this by having the representatives appoint the prime minister.

    Thereby, local communities vote for representatives (electors) who then elect the Prime Minister at their will.

    The only difference is the US system has a separate executive, not one which serves in confidence of the legislature.
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2018
  8. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The NDRC exists purely to help democrats, right?

    Would it be one person, one vote if there was no redistricting?

    How is this not the case in the US?

    Countries like Australia where I live. Are you saying that it should be this way in the land of the free?

    What countries are newborn babies given ID cards?

    Of course, there's no such thing as a non-workday, so don't you just mean the weekend when the majority aren't working?
     
  9. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Interesting turn of phrase but factually incorrect.

    There are two categories of political power, one state and the other national. The state elects not only representatives to State congresses. That's fine.

    But representatives to both the nation's Senate and the HofR are an altogther different grouping where the state itself should have no say whatsoever on how to elect the PotUS. Which indeed should not be allowed since all states should employ EXACTLY THE SAME MECHANISM - which would be only fair and correct.

    But that's not how it works in the US. Moreover, not only do we finagle the vote at the Electoral College, but y Gerrymandering the vote of the HoR by means of redistricting, the states actually manipulate the outcomes at the HofR.

    Neither the EC nor Gerrymandering can be considered acceptable elements of a voting systems. They are both perfidious efforts to manipulate the popular-vote to obtain a party-favoritized outcome.

    Which happens because of an antiquated Amendement (12) of the Constitution that allows states to constitute an Electoral College and there is no legal determination of who that EC consists or how or why.

    Which gives some states the right to "finagle" the EC-vote. That's unfair and should be outlawed. Gerrymandering exists in many states thus giving political parties the ability to gerrymander state-elections as well.

    Both manipulations are aberrations of democratic principles of fairness and honesty ...
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2018
  10. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Nope. They nominate the head of the party that wins the unrigged popular-vote to be Prime Minister.

    That often takes two iterations of voting, but so what ... ?
     
  11. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The US Presidency is not a state-election. It is national in nature. Congress is a purely state-wide election.

    The presidency is a national election by state. But only out of convention, that is "habit". It should be regulated as a national election. In Congress, only the HofR elects representative by means of gerrymandered voting districts. This should be outlawed.

    There is NO COGENT REASON for voting-districts to be carved out to favor particular parties, Democrat or Replicant.

    Which should, as I have said many a time here, report ONLY the popular-vote for PotUS to Congress, which counts them and ratifies the results.

    The fact that the states count the votes is an historical usage that dates from a time when reporting the vote required each state to send "runners" to Washington.

    That is no longer necessary in this day and age. Uncle Sam needs to learn hot to evolve. Especially since the rest of the developed world EMPLOYS ONLY THE RESULTS OF THE POPULAR-VOTE TO ELECT THE HEAD OF STATE ...
     
  12. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What "tyranny"? You're exaggerating grossly. The Real Tyranny is the manipulation of the popular-vote by means of the either the Electoral-College that DOES NOT REFLECT the popular vote or state-voting that is gerrymandered to maximize the outcome for one or the other party.

    C'mon, this sort of insanity MUST STOP! And just because it's been around since the 12th Amendment was passed in 1812 MAKES NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER!

    No country with a sense of political fairness or justice would or should accept such blatant manipulations of the Popular Vote - which are the only veritable expressions of the peoples' collective-will at the ballot-box ... !
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2018
  13. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-to-vote-fairly.542461/page-3#post-1069732430
     
  14. DentalFloss

    DentalFloss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Messages:
    11,445
    Likes Received:
    3,263
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We do not live in a direct democracy. We live in a Constitutional Republic, which is vastly superior. What you may not realize is that you actually don't have a "right" to vote for a Presidential candidate in the first place, it's just that all 50 States have chosen to do it that way. They don't have to. Senators used to be selected/elected by their respective State Legislatures, and we should probably go back to that.
     
  15. DentalFloss

    DentalFloss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Messages:
    11,445
    Likes Received:
    3,263
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is an absolutely terrifying thought.
     
  16. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,762
    Likes Received:
    14,563
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It creates a tyranny of people who live in high population areas. It puts everyone else out of business. It's OK with me, though. I quit caring about who wins elections. I'm happy when we have gridlock.
     
  17. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You want to say why? Unless of course your fundamentally misogynist.

    In which case you might want to see a psychiatrist ... ?
     
  18. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Bollocks!

    Moving right along ...
     
  19. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yet another one who does not understand English.

    Republic and democracy are synonymous. Take a course in Civics. You need it badly ...
     
  20. Moonglow

    Moonglow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2013
    Messages:
    20,754
    Likes Received:
    8,047
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Founding Fathers didn't want the citizens to elect the President or Vice President and wanted governors to select Senate members, only the House of Representatives was supposed to have popular votes by men citizens.
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2018
  21. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113

    LOL LOL LOL

    You argue from a group run by Eric Holder, the contemptible attorney general for obama, one of the most partisan and crooked people ever.

    TOTALLY DISCREDITED. LOL LOL LOL LOL
     
  22. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,762
    Likes Received:
    14,563
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I guess I left you speechless.
     
  23. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Given the lack of education and the fact that England was clearling its prisons by sending jailbirds to the US, what happened back then is understandable.

    We are a long, long way beyond that time. But, we've dragged along with us the tedious 12 Amendment that should never have been passed ...
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2018
  24. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Tyranny me arse!

    It creates an anomaly that contradicts the true meaning of a Real Democracy. That is, the election of representative by means of the popular-vote and only the popular vote.

    Which we have in most elections, but the results nonetheless are manipulated by gerrymandering. In fact, in researching the subject I

    We are not the democracy we should be and never have been since the 12th Amendment legitimized the Electoral College. And, the same year (1812) , the Governor of Massachusetts manipulated the vote by means of regrouping constituencies to favor candidates he wanted elected.

    And, despite the obvious manipulation, we have merrily for two-centuries allowed it to continue!

    You seem to have forgot that people died to defend your "liberty". There is no sense in giving up, and many people are standing up to fight for a Fair & Honest Democracy, which is a long, hard battle that will neither be won this election nor for some time to come.

    So the sooner we start, the better ... !
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2018
  25. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,762
    Likes Received:
    14,563
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gerrymandering is an organizational problem. Politicians will do whatever increases their power and control. You need to reorganize things so that congressional districts are defined by something other than politicians. I don't care about gerrymandering because it is a political activity and I disapprove of all political activities. So I will leave the solution up to you.



    I don't care about elections either because they never fix anything. They simply change the names on the doors. I'll leave that one up to you as well. I can't imagine why you think I don't understand where freedom arises. The proper goal of government is to defend and insure freedom. In fact it does more of the opposite. You vote. I'll adapt.
     

Share This Page