That is probably true. Get rid of elections and parties. Let all those interested take a test to prove their knowledge of current national issues and select parliament members randomly from those who pass. Doing so would also eliminate the giant waste of resources that is party ads and make it much harder for big sponsors to influence politics. It would also get rid of the problem of uniformed voters.
Last edited by ArmouredHedgehog; 08/11/2005:19 AM.
I sometimes use thought experiments. I don't necessarily believe in every idea I post for discussion on this forum
I do not live in the United States, but it seems to me that Americans need to reform the outdated electoral system. Why do we need Electoral College if you can just count the total number of votes like in other countries? I read that there were cases when more Americans voted for the losing candidate, but more Electoral College votes.
If there are US residents in this thread, please explain why Electoral College is better than direct voting
Thanks to Larian for Baldurs Gate 3 and the reaction to player feedback
The Electoral College is a similar idea to the UK's own system of parliamentary seats, although with major differences.
Theoretically, in the UK you vote for a local MP. This MP may, or may not, represent a political party. The party with the most MPs voted in gets to run the country and it's own leader becomes PM. This leads to issues of 'popular' versus 'significant' votes in the same way as the USA, because an MP's voting constituency may be very small compared to another, yet his appointment is equal (i.e. a single House of Commons seat). It is entirely possible (indeed, probable) to win more seats yet have less overall votes nationally.
The major difference between the UK and USA during elections is that we vote for individual MPs and not for our PM.
The same problem exists with the EU parliament. Citizens of small nations like Luxembourg have far more influence than an equal number of germans. The US is made up of individual states. It was not intended to be a strong centralized nation. The constitution was made with the intent to limit the power of the central government. The constitution and indivdual rights first, then the states, then Washington. Some european nations like France have a very strong central government, others like Germany are much more federal. The US is a more extreme case of a federal system. Some people blame the US system for not being truly democratic but it never was intended to be primarily about demoracy. To quote the US Embassy "While often categorized as a democracy, the United States is more accurately defined as a constitutional federal republic" I would also like to point to the book "A republic, if we can keep it" by supreme court judge Neal Gorsuch. Election based democracy is crumbling. I hope that there will be some non-dictatorial alternative ready when it fails. So far most people are addicted to the tribal surrogate of parties, politicians and the illusion of choice provided by elections. They won't even dare to consider the alternatives.
Last edited by ArmouredHedgehog; 08/11/2003:55 PM.
I sometimes use thought experiments. I don't necessarily believe in every idea I post for discussion on this forum
The same problem exists with the EU parliament. Citizens of small nations like Luxembourg have far more influence than an equal number of germans. The US is made up of individual states. It was not intended to be a strong centralized nation. The constitution was made with the intent to limit the power of the central government. The constitution and indivdual rights first, then the states, then Washington. Some european nations like France have a very strong central government, others like Germany are much more federal. The US is a more extreme case of a federal system. Some people blame the US system for not being truly democratic but it never was intended to be primarily about demoracy. To quote the US Embassy "While often categorized as a democracy, the United States is more accurately defined as a constitutional federal republic" I would also like to point to the book "A republic, if we can keep it" by supreme court judge Neal Gorsuch. Election based democracy is crumbling. I hope that there will be some non-dictatorial alternative ready when it fails. So far most people are too addicted to the tribal surrogate of parties, politicians and the illusion of choice provided by elections
+1 Haven't voted for years. Parties live here and now, politicians do not wonder what country they will leave behind.
I think the intention of "government" is usually to improve lives by making money/resources available for the things society needs. I really do believe its a force for good but not every politician is there for the good of the country etc. I'm a centarist libertairian at heart but I still see a role for government. I can afford my own health care, car, holidays etc but there are many many people who are not equipped with the skills and or are incapable of learning the skills needed for a "successful" life and for me, thats what government does. Or at least tries to. Help those that need support along the way. I have no problem helping to fund those goals. I think Joe is a decent guy and I totally support the election result. Just hope his "faith" doesnt get in the way. From what I've read though, he seems to have a decent attitude. I loved Obama but not having control of the senate probably made it a lot harder to fully realise his goals. I wish the US well (if thats possible) Will watch the developments with interest.
I am negative about EUROPE main politics.. . I will not say much about USA politics, but Obama was worst president during my lifetime so far. Biden to early to judge by far yet.
No I am not left liberal at all. I belong to True Finns and at polls right now we belong to top biggest political parties in Finland.
The politics now is like this. In about roughly 20-50 years in future I really believe no joke when there is not enough food etc. we can have in most of the world DYSTOPIA government. Population will grow and grow and the trend of leftis liberals are to take in more and more immigrants without regard on impact to the economy it does. Do not get me wrong I am all for those who come and work or study hard that kind of people that work are ok for me or tourists visiting.
Movies like The Hunger games movies and Divergent (2014) were indeed great for me. Divergent young teenager 18 years old girl serious relationship with about 30 years old man? I am ok with that fuck same age politics. Finland presidents first wife died... and Finland president have children of his own that also have children. My country Finland president at 71 years age got a new son with his new wife that was 40 years old when the child was born. They are happily married still and I think their baby is like 1 year+ old now maybe.
Movies like the new Joker (2019) was great for me indeed. Perhaps at some point also people get enough of shit politics in Europe main politics with crap leftist views.
Well so perhaps a revolution or in future Dystopia government. Nice UTOPIA to all? I find it totally unrealistic and I really believe there can in future be a a Dystopia government.
Well so do I like Dystopia government? No, but in that direction we go when leftist can not rule and there is more debt and bad economy in the world. I actually find the main heroes inspiring in The Hunger Games and The Divergent they try to fight back more or less vs the Dystopia government system. Dystopia government or perhaps Anarchy as in Joker (2019 movie) or this musicvideo that is what we are heading for with left liberals who can not take care of economy:
Free food for everbody = People will eat insects, soy full of estrogen or whatever S H I T your master choose for you to eat (real shit included)
I am not a sardistic evil that enjoy people dying of hungry, it´s simple NATURE. If someone control what you eat, then this someone control you.
Food is one thing but how will the governments pay their growing debt? In addition that we eat insects at that point many have gone past if they consider revolution worth doing it. I would rather do revolution then eat insects as my food source. I get fear factory TV reality show to eat insects to show you are brave as rare exception ok to do it.
Norway in Europe is an industrial country with oil resources. Norway have no debt whatsoever. I am not against taking in immigrants if you can handle the economy. In fact Norway has lended money to other countries. Norway is huge exception towards USA and the huge majority of countries in Europe governments that take more and more debt. Norway is like the white mans oil Sheiks in this music video:
Well and about green politics and fish as food source. China is number one enemy to fishing and seafoods. I predict many species will become extinct due to China. In addition China tries blame COVID 19 start on USA. Everybody that are not brainwashed by China propaganda knows that COVID 19 started in China mainland. There is one Chinese thing I respect: Taiwan that has their own government separate from main land China. Ok one other thing. Bruce Lee came from Hong Kong he was a legendary martial arts Kung Fu master during his time. China martial arts traditions Kung Fu and such things I do like.
Africa is a lost continent long ago and will become even worse in future climate change and global warming.
In addition I do not trust my government makes reduction already to pension payments at this stage. Can the USA people really trust their 401k pension system in about 20-50 years future? I do hope that, but I do not trust the governments.
I do not live in the United States, but it seems to me that Americans need to reform the outdated electoral system. Why do we need Electoral College if you can just count the total number of votes like in other countries? I read that there were cases when more Americans voted for the losing candidate, but more Electoral College votes.
If there are US residents in this thread, please explain why Electoral College is better than direct voting
Before I start, I am not politics major, nor would I consider myself highly political, so these are my best recollections of what I was taught some 35+ years ago.
We would only need to reform the electoral system if we wanted to change from the democratic republic to a democracy. The way the US government is set up is to balance the rights of the people with the rights of the states. As the federal government was always supposed to be really small, and sticking to the enumerated "powers" it was granted (but got corrupted and grew over time), the states were supposed to be the ones with the majority of the power within their own borders. We didn't want a large populous state (like say California) or a small group of highly populous states being able to overpower the voice of the smaller rural states. That is why the house (or representatives) is appointed a number of representatives for each state based on it's population, but representation in the senate is only 2 per state. To pass a law, not only then must it be the popular choice by population, but it must also be the popular choice by number of accepting states.
The electoral college then, is made up of 1 vote per house representative and 1 vote per senate representative. That then makes it a shared/balanced vote between the will of the population and the will of the states. That is how our president is elected, and how we keep smaller more rural states from having their voices silenced by the larger more urban states. That arrangement is also why many of the smaller/rural states joined the union in the first place.