1
   

Political things which need fixing

 
 
swolf
 
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 07:26 am
Here's a minimal list of things I'd figure was necessary if our system is to survive:

1. A constitutional ammendment mandating runoff elections for all elected offices. Nobody should ever hold an office with less than 50% of the vote and nobody should ever fear to vote his first choice, at least on a first ballot. When a party like the democrats goes rogue, it has to be possible for some third party to rise up and replace it. Under the present system, it isn't. There are in fact websites promoting "instant runoff" voting and a couple of other systems, any of which would be more intelligent than what we are doing now.

2. An ammendment requiring that "None of the Above" be a choice on all ballots and that, if that choice should win in an election, the other candidates would be barred for life from holding any public office, and the parties which sponsored them barred for 20 years from running candidates for that particular office. The penalty for running dead wood for public offices needs to be ferocious.

3. An ammendment stating that if a president is impeached and removed, his vice president goes out with him and the presidency is handed over to the oldest US senator of the impeached/removed president's party for the remainder of the term. It should not be easy to remove a president, but it should not be impossible either and at present, it is impossible and the system is clearly broken. If we couldn't get rid of Slick, we'd not be able to get rid of Hitler or Mussolini either.


Voting by other means:

http://www.instantrunoff.com/

http://electionmethods.org/index.htm
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 648 • Replies: 7
No top replies

 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 07:47 am
I wouldn't support any of these 3 proposals.

Quote:
A constitutional ammendment mandating runoff elections for all elected offices.


Since this clearly says "all elected offices" that means runoff elections for the local dog catcher too. That seems a bit over the top.

Quote:
An ammendment requiring that "None of the Above" be a choice on all ballots and that, if that choice should win in an election, the other candidates would be barred for life from holding any public office, and the parties which sponsored them barred for 20 years from running candidates for that particular office. The penalty for running dead wood for public offices needs to be ferocious.


So again, someone that runs for President and loses can't go back home and run for mayor for at least 20 years? "dead wood" is in the eye of the beholder.

Quote:
An ammendment stating that if a president is impeached and removed, his vice president goes out with him and the presidency is handed over to the oldest US senator of the impeached/removed president's party for the remainder of the term.


Guilt by association? An impeachment is a criminal proceeding conducted by the legislative branch. Sorry, if both are to be removed from office then both had better be found guilty of committing offenses.
0 Replies
 
swolf
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 11:15 am
The basic reality of what happened in 99 was that Trent Lott simply refused to hand the presidency over to Algor with a year left on Slick's second term, regardless of evidence or circumstances. That's unacceptable. No person and no party should profit or benefit from his or its own evil deeds. There would be no stigma attached to a vice president leaving with an impeached president and, again, the system as it presently stands is completely broken. Something has to give.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 11:24 am
swolf.....another transparent swipe at the democratic party no more no less.......do try to be more clever won't you?
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 11:32 am
swolf wrote:
The basic reality of what happened in 99 was that Trent Lott simply refused to hand the presidency over to Algor with a year left on Slick's second term, regardless of evidence or circumstances. That's unacceptable.


Trent Lott made up his own mind and did what he chose to do for reasons of his own. If Al Gore commited an impeachable offense then the House could have impeached him for it. No one, including Gore, should be held responsible for the actions of someone else.

Quote:
No person and no party should profit or benefit from his or its own evil deeds.


No person and no party should be able to profit or benefit by booting an innocent person from office for something they didn't do either.
0 Replies
 
swolf
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 11:55 am
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
swolf.....another transparent swipe at the democratic party no more no less.......do try to be more clever won't you?


As I noted, the thing I posted above is a minimal list. Solving those problems might suffice, and it might not.

If you really want to solve the problems presented by the democrat party, a couple of other things might be necessary as well.

The 2000 election was close only by dint of massive fraud on the part of the democrats. 100% Voter turnout was being claimed in areas in which, on a given day, half the adult population is either drunk on their asses, flaked out, cracked out, dead, in prison, otherwise occupied, or otherwise incapacitated. A 60,000 vote lead by W. with 20 minutes to go was all but wiped out by some sort of major vote manufacturing effort which simply missed the count by a couple of thousand. In fact, the only way anybody ever came up with to produce a "dimpled chad" by test with the voting machines used in Florida was by punching fifteen or twenty ballots at the same time. Dimpled chads are an artifact of vote manufacturing.

Now, I don't have a perfect solution to the problem of democrat voting fraud and would appreciate hearing suggestions. One possibility I've heard would be to end the "war on drugs" and declare a "war on fraud" on the same day, figuring that every druggie thrown out of prison would be one more prison cell available for a democrat.

Another possibility which I could live with pretty easily would be to eliminate the secret ballot entirely. Americans no longer live in Peyton Place or company towns and in our present litigeous society in which nobody can be fired for real reasons any more, I'd be more than happy to count on John Edwards and his cohorts to keep people from being fired for how they vote. I don't think it would happen. The idea would be to have everybody's SSN and ballot available on a national database which anybody could check up on.

But, like I say, I haven't heard of a totally perfect solution to that one, and would appreciate hearing other ideas.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 12:16 pm
well, that's might thoughty of you swolf but really seems like an extra cost burden on the old budget to let the druggies out of prison and then send then back in under the umbrella of "democrats." I always figured drugies and democrats to be the same cast of characters anyway. I guess you would think of it as money well spent, you know, recycling and all.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 02:12 pm
I'm sorry what did you say dys? I lost my train of thought........
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Political things which need fixing
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/02/2024 at 11:11:01