Compulsory voting is a good thing.

I support self-ownership and voting, when all comes around, is the enemy of self-ownership as it leaves my destinity in the hands of others and others' destiny in my hands - a form of collective-ownership where "private property of self" is completely absent.

Now, I realise that my radical opinions and wet dreams of decentralisation, de-democratisation and regional autonomy are miiiiles away from ever becoming reality and that I just have to live with what we got. For someone like me there are thus three available strategies when it comes to voting;

1. Self-defense voting: Vote for the party/candidate that is the lesser of evils and that will cause the least relative harm.
2. Not vote at all: When all comes around, it does not really matters who wins. Nationalised mass-democracy is doomed to fail by default.
3. Vote for the prettiest candidate: Because f-k it!

 

I vote for the Straight, White Man.

Today's underdog.


I also vote for the Southern Californian over the Northern Californian,
hurrah! Really. Traditional Bay Area Dynasties run both parties here.

 

How horrible.

I guess with a history of being a prison colony,
such intrusion by the powers of gov't go unnoticed.
I've been trying to explain that to Sallyally but she just doesn't get it.


Moi

r > g

Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic,
regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.​

 

I would have to look into the Ranked system to fully agree with it, but on the surface I could be on board with it. As for someone other than a Republican or a Democrat at the helm, I agree. I go back to my opening statement though. The psychological need for many people to be able to say "I picked the winner" will override the desire for someone else. I really feel like the desire for a 3rd party was strong this year and when a 3rd party was on the ballot in all 50 states people still voted for 1 of the to worst choices in my election history. Was Johnson a little strange.....yes, but was he better than the other to......I think so.

Until people put their morals and convictions before their egos I don't see anyone other than a Republican or Democrat in office unless 2 possibilities happen. The person is posing as one of the 2 or there is a major shift in the country and at this point it may get ugly to get that shift.

 

Better to vote independent/third party than not vote at all.

 

I agree that we need a better system and the Ranked System is an acceptable alternative. What I can say for certain is that it won't happen under the current extremists in power because they won't commit political suicide.

In essence We the People are going to have to do this via a grass roots initiative from the ground up because it won't happen in Congress. Can you imagine if there was a Ranked System in 2016 and neither of the two party candidates won a majority it is entirely possible that there could have a Libertarian POTUS instead? (At least marijuana would have been legalized. ) And yes, in all fairness that would have been an improvement over what we have now in the Oval office.

But step further back to the 2016 primaries and looking at the results and it is entirely possible that Bernie would have been the Dem candidate under a Ranked System and Kasich the GOP candidate. They would have been much better choices for We the People IMO.

 

Apropos jug handles-unfamiliar with them. In Melbourne, we have hook turns- these are so that trams aren't blocked by cars making a right turn. Scarey the first time( am I doing it right, turning too early, is someone going to collide with me)
I'll google pickle rick and jug handle.

 

Only thing that would make me see voting as less of a waste would be if we first saw an extensive process of seccession leading to the formation of autonomous regions and the destruction of nations. Mass-democracy has proven to be a failure and as I see it, democracy can only - if at all - work on a very small scale. If I had to choose a form of government, it would be a monarchy though.

 

I think we should be able to sell our votes legally. Everybody but the voters get a cut of the election pie.

 

Wouldn't even try to disagree if I did.

That actually makes boards like this really important.

Sure, it's pretty polarized, but boards like this usually are, regardless of the number on the membership list.

The important thing, is that with enough members steadily drumming the beat if cooperation/negotiation, the more "stands" that have their foundations on extreme ideologies, are shown for what they are.

"Quick-fixes" at best, but certain failure in the long run.

Venzuela as a recent example.

(not a Rick & Morty fan, but I caught Teh Pickel! . )

 

Like a proxy at an AGM.

 

Hmm, you might notice my sig.

If the publics wants are manipulated by media, and they've been made negligent of their needs by the same media, then politics as usual simply will continue, but with a different appearance.

 

On the face, your question would get a "yes" from me, but . . . I know how much the elites control peoples thinking, and how they have done so for nearly a century using mass media. Since democracy runs on opinion, and opinion is controlled by information, and information comes from media, LOL, I'm glad you are not talking about direct democracy.

My effort is focused on ending what I can show is an abridging of the PURPOSE of free speech. Primarily its higher purposes. I have good evidence showing that the torys worked to create opposition to the framers that prevented those higher purposes from being included in the DOI and constitution. Meaning the people MUST use Article V to put those definitions of right into the constitution where they belong, while such is still possible.

And, considering the monumental dysfunction in politics currently, its a very good time for this proposal.

http://algoxy.com/law/lawfulpeacefulrevolution.html

 

You are asking Americans about voting laws in Austrailia?

Who care what you do there?

 

Does this sentiment include the pollsters telling the public what they determine to be the outcome prior to the vote? All in an effort to influence the vote?

 

Exactly

The liberal pollsters are notorious liars

 

Alt right DISINFORMATION is not a substitute for FACTS!