Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Would you support this?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Would you support this? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Would you support this? - 12/8/2010 5:53:31 PM   
DarkSteven


Posts: 28072
Joined: 5/2/2008
Status: offline 		Right now, elections are winner-take-all.  If I win an election over someone by a single vote, then I take office and he or she doesn't.

Would you support a different system, where if I get 60% of the popular vote and my opponent gets 40%, then I get 60% of a vote and he or she gets 40%?

This would result in a more representative legislative body, and also make ridiculous scenarios like Miller/Murkowski moot.  It would also make gerrymandering pointless.


_____________________________

"You women....

The small-breasted ones want larger breasts. The large-breasted ones want smaller ones. The straight-haired ones curl their hair, and the curly-haired ones straighten theirs...

Quit fretting. We men love you."
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Would you support this? - 12/8/2010 5:59:50 PM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		IMO more issues ought to be ballot initiatives.

PA has very few of those... 

(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Would you support this? - 12/8/2010 6:09:56 PM   
Arpig


Posts: 9930
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: Increasingly further from reality
Status: offline 		Might work in a two-party setup, but would be total chaos in a system with multiple parties.

_____________________________

Big man! Pig Man!
Ha Ha...Charade you are!

Why do they leave out the letter b on "Garage Sale" signs?

CM's #1 All-Time Also-Ran


(in reply to pahunkboy)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Would you support this? - 12/8/2010 6:10:48 PM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		It sounds like a power sharing arrangement.   

(in reply to Arpig)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Would you support this? - 12/8/2010 6:25:08 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		So all you have to do to get a vote in Congress is run?

Come on.

What would you do for the primaries?

(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Would you support this? - 12/8/2010 6:25:35 PM   
DarkSteven


Posts: 28072
Joined: 5/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

Might work in a two-party setup, but would be total chaos in a system with multiple parties.


Why?  Legislators can vote Yes or No, same as now.  The only chaos will be with horse trading and backroom deals.

It will make earmarks and pork more difficult.


_____________________________

"You women....

The small-breasted ones want larger breasts. The large-breasted ones want smaller ones. The straight-haired ones curl their hair, and the curly-haired ones straighten theirs...

Quit fretting. We men love you."

(in reply to Arpig)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Would you support this? - 12/8/2010 6:35:58 PM   
Arpig


Posts: 9930
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: Increasingly further from reality
Status: offline 		Well, in Canada you have 3 to 5 candidates in every riding (district for you guys), this would increse the number of politicians drawing full pay and pensions enormously, and you would have a shit load of batshit types with 1% of a vote. We have a Natural Law party that wants to teach everybody "yogic levitation" which will result in good Karma and make Canada a paradise of some sort.... do we really want people like this in parliament or congress...all they have to do is run a candidate in every riding and get at least 1 vote and they flood the damned legislature with useless moronic members who will try introduce bizarre laws and programs, wasting time and resources.
Imagine a congress with 3000 or so members, none of whom has a full vote. It will increase porkbarreling and earmarks exponentially, as you will have to buy off 3 or 4 people to get a single vote, getting a majority would be damn near impossible so sweet fuck all would be accomplished. I realize that the US federal Gvt is designed not to work efficiently, but doubling or tripling (or worse) the number of members and reducing the influence within the body of everybody would render it uttely impotent.

_____________________________

Big man! Pig Man!
Ha Ha...Charade you are!

Why do they leave out the letter b on "Garage Sale" signs?

CM's #1 All-Time Also-Ran


(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Would you support this? - 12/8/2010 7:27:05 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		I think more proportional representation would be a good thing, Steve, but, no offense, I can't come up with a more hare-brained scheme to do it, than what you've raised here.

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Would you support this? - 12/8/2010 8:03:19 PM   
DarkSteven


Posts: 28072
Joined: 5/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

I think more proportional representation would be a good thing, Steve, but, no offense, I can't come up with a more hare-brained scheme to do it, than what you've raised here.


Yeah, Arpig's posts about Canada kinda convinced me.

_____________________________

"You women....

The small-breasted ones want larger breasts. The large-breasted ones want smaller ones. The straight-haired ones curl their hair, and the curly-haired ones straighten theirs...

Quit fretting. We men love you."

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Would you support this? - 12/8/2010 9:55:22 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

IMO more issues ought to be ballot initiatives.

PA has very few of those... 



PaHunk, I agree, I'd like to see more binding referendums, especially on the state and federal level.
I want the govt to "ask" The People what we want!


_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to pahunkboy)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Would you support this? - 12/8/2010 10:02:51 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

IMO more issues ought to be ballot initiatives.

PA has very few of those... 



PaHunk, I agree, I'd like to see more binding referendums, especially on the state and federal level.
I want the govt to "ask" The People what we want!



Yeah, California is proof positive of the effectiveness of referendums.

Just declare a State of Emergency to make up for the electorates abject ignorance.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Would you support this? - 12/8/2010 10:03:16 PM   
luckydawg


Posts: 2448
Joined: 9/2/2009
Status: offline 		How about converting the House to a system where you vote nationally for a party. Then the seats get assigned by %. Say 200 memebers, if the greens get 3% of the vote they get 6 seats.

We already have changed the way the Senate works so keep that as it is, with Senators tied to geographic areas.

_____________________________

I was posting as Right Wing Hippie, but that account got messed up.

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Would you support this? - 12/8/2010 10:09:19 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		FR

Proportional representation would be the result if it were implemented correctly. But then we can't pay all these people. Why do we pay them anyway ? Why does it cost so much. Pay them what the soldiers who fight their wars get paid and let's see what happens.

There are other countries that have more than two political parties and in some way partially accomplish this, just a bit. The assholes here would never do it right. You think it's bad enough supporting over five hundred leeches all the time ? Well think about retirement. If we have to keep paying them for the rest of their lives they'll break the countr........ never mind, they already did that.

T

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Would you support this? - 12/9/2010 8:45:24 AM   
truckinslave


Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline 		No.
IMO many of the changes we have made to the Constitution have been mistakes.
The law of unintended (and entirely unforseen) consequences would wreak hell with this one.
Starting with, I think, depressing the vote.


_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Would you support this? - 12/9/2010 2:36:12 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydawg

How about converting the House to a system where you vote nationally for a party. Then the seats get assigned by %. Say 200 memebers, if the greens get 3% of the vote they get 6 seats.

We already have changed the way the Senate works so keep that as it is, with Senators tied to geographic areas.

The trouble with that is the Constitution. This goes against States' rights.

(in reply to luckydawg)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Would you support this? - 12/9/2010 4:07:14 PM   
DomImus


Posts: 2004
Joined: 3/17/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250
PaHunk, I agree, I'd like to see more binding referendums, especially on the state and federal level.
I want the govt to "ask" The People what we want!


Referendums are generally a horrendous idea. One step away from mob rule. The founding fathers were smart enough to sidestep a system where the people self govern in this manner. Some days when I look at all the morons in Washington I wonder if it could get any worse then I look at all the morons in California and I think "Yes, it can".


_____________________________

"Regret for the things we did can be tempered by time; it is regret for the things we did not do that is inconsolable." Sidney J. harris

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Would you support this? - 12/9/2010 4:22:20 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Amen.

(in reply to DomImus)
Profile   Post #: 17
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Would you support this? Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.059