quote:

Nicely put. I'd definitely agree that education is going to be a lot more healthy than coercion. Also, a more politically educated population won't be as easily manipulated through strawmen and scarecrows.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

That is true, but to my way of thinking it's further proof that your public school system needs a pretty thorough revamp.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

trying to force them into voting for somebody they don't wish to see in power

Nonsense. You can vote for anyone you wish. Ask for a pen and write in a name.

and write on the electronic voting machine?  LMAO

Personally, I'd ask for a paper ballot too. I can't speak for you.

and you would rightfully be the laughing stock.

what country are you from again?

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

I seldom vote anymore, and if i were compelled to do so I'd probably just write in my own candidates for every office. One clown is the same as another clown as far as I'm concerned.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

What's interesting is that, as the policy paper notes, we are more polarized than at any time since the 1890s. At the same time, we have low turnouts, and the last time we had very high turnout was--the 1890s.

Of course, they didn't have television and the Internet then. They did, however, pass quite a few populist positions, including direct election of U.S. Senators.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

This is why there is no real change - people like you should be voting for independents or the Green party.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

I seldom vote anymore, and if i were compelled to do so I'd probably just write in my own candidates for every office. One clown is the same as another clown as far as I'm concerned.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SL4V3M4YB3

FR-ATSOL

Better representation leads to increased voting, it's quite simple but it seems those in power haven't figured it out yet.

quote:

ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack
I think you need to try reverse psychology. Announce that you're going to be restricting the vote. That anyone who doesn't vote in the next five elections loses their vote. Or that you're implementing a test on current events that must be passed prior to someone being allowed to vote. Say you're putting it up for referendum.

I betcha voter turnout hits new levels.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

quote:

ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack
I think you need to try reverse psychology. Announce that you're going to be restricting the vote. That anyone who doesn't vote in the next five elections loses their vote. Or that you're implementing a test on current events that must be passed prior to someone being allowed to vote. Say you're putting it up for referendum.

I betcha voter turnout hits new levels.

I like the way you think.

quote:

ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

What's interesting is that, as the policy paper notes, we are more polarized than at any time since the 1890s. At the same time, we have low turnouts, and the last time we had very high turnout was--the 1890s.

Of course, they didn't have television and the Internet then. They did, however, pass quite a few populist positions, including direct election of U.S. Senators.

Also, back then, many people didn't have the vote.

I think you need to try reverse psychology. Announce that you're going to be restricting the vote. That anyone who doesn't vote in the next five elections loses their vote. Or that you're implementing a test on current events that must be passed prior to someone being allowed to vote. Say you're putting it up for referendum.

I betcha voter turnout hits new levels.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
ok here lets try this since people do not seem to get it.

PROVE you are being represented. In other words introduce to the court a bonafide fact that you have been represented.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SL4V3M4YB3

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
ok here lets try this since people do not seem to get it.

PROVE you are being represented. In other words introduce to the court a bonafide fact that you have been represented.

Prove a jury will understand such evidence in the way I do.

Well lets see, you vote on a referendum and your so called representatives prove to that jury that they represent the voice of the majority by the receipt of your vote on the matter.

How much more straight forward can that be?  A whole bunch of pieces of paper that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt they chose to go with the majority.  Not that it matters by you because you are not held to the same standards we are "supposed" to be.

I feel represented in my views thus I'm represented.

So proof is in how you feel?  Tell that to a jury LMAO

My views have been incorporated into how the government works.

Well everyone gets lucky to "some" extent.

It isn't perfect because it isn't just my views that matter unfortunately.

Isnt perfect?  Its wrought with corruption

You also have these crazy people (in my view although I could be crazy too) that are also allowed to ask for things. Overall though those crazy people will be fewer in number than the sensible ones so through an iterative approach we come up with the way a society should work.

I wont argue that but without running a referendum for everything there is validation of th account. sorry thems the facts regardless how you FEEL about it.

Just like in quality control you have two options: spot and eliminate the defeats or understand how such defects arise in the first place. People with defective opinions need to be convinced they are wrong because the alternative isn't very desirable.

So convince them by providing no evidence to the contrary!  RIGHT!!!!!


You feel unrepresented because perhaps you are expecting a word on a page to jump to life and do something.

It has NOTHING to do with how I feel and is strictly a matter of record.  No paper no documentation no proof get it? Really kindergarten simple shit man.


It takes people to ultimately do things, they may have some set of instructions written down by a politician but sooner or later there will be a random circumstance where no written set of instructions apply, you then expect the person to make a judgement.

no speak for yourself not the rest of us.

I expect a referendum with receipts on EVERYTHING or I have NO say, NO VALIDATED representation. PERIOD.

Stop talking about the law as if it is this magic entity that can fix all the problems of the world and judge right from wrong.

WTF??????  That was a joke right?

Judging right from wrong can only occur if there is some baseline to begin with.
drivel

I know of no legal baseline to judge whether or not a person is represented by the vote they have but then I'm lucky not to call myself a lawyer.

HUH????  I already gave you one and again in this post.

At school I didn't choose a path that would lead me to believe all we need are words and courtroom, to fix the world.

This is probably a big reply for two lines of text but it's borne of this frustration I have in your unwillingness to see the world other than through a legal context. This is meaningless to the uninitiated amongst us. It's probably meaningless to those few that are initiated also. I walked to the shops the other day but I need the court to decide for me what to buy when I get there.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

You have some really nutty ideas on how things work.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

You have some really nutty ideas on how things work.

This may be the funniest thing I have ever heard.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Silence8

Why can't we vote online?

Works for the stock market.

There should be referendums on all major legislation, maybe even court cases.

Slowly phase out representatives. All they represent is representation (money).