| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 23 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 52:03:10 |
| Calls: | 583 |
| Files: | 1,139 |
| Messages: | 111,529 |
On 8/23/2025 6:51 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
"SchwarzeneggerrCOs mission: Terminate partisan rigging of CaliforniarCOs
electoral maps
Former governor has long campaigned against partisan rigging of
electoral districts and is not about to stop now: rCyWe are not going to
go into a stinking contest with a skunkrCO"
That's cute.-a But it does not address the reality of the situation.
You also don't want a skunk to grab you by the balls.-a Very bad
situation.
All we need to do is abolish the Electoral College, grant individual
direct voting and install term limits on all politicians and judges.
Everyone gets one direct vote. One man, or woman, one vote forpoliticians and judges to serve one single term of four years.
Problem solved.
On 8/23/25 10:22 AM, Dude wrote:
On 8/23/2025 6:51 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
All we need to do is abolish the Electoral College, grant individual
"SchwarzeneggerrCOs mission: Terminate partisan rigging of CaliforniarCOs >>> electoral maps
Former governor has long campaigned against partisan rigging of
electoral districts and is not about to stop now: rCyWe are not going to >>> go into a stinking contest with a skunkrCO"
That's cute.-a But it does not address the reality of the situation.
You also don't want a skunk to grab you by the balls.-a Very bad
situation.
The electoral college protects the rest of the country
from corrupt states.
direct voting and install term limits on all politicians and judges.
Everyone gets one direct vote. One man, or woman, one vote forpoliticians and judges to serve one single term of four years.
That would make political machines more powerful to the detriment
of individual politicians, and the voters who vote for them.
Problem solved.
Which problem? because there's nothing in term limits or direct
voting of presidents that solves the problem of corrupt politics
other than to make it worse.
On 8/23/2025 10:07 PM, Pluted Pup wrote:
On 8/23/25 10:22 AM, Dude wrote:The key word is Transparency.
On 8/23/2025 6:51 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
All we need to do is abolish the Electoral College, grant individual
"SchwarzeneggerAs mission: Terminate partisan rigging of CaliforniaAs
electoral maps
Former governor has long campaigned against partisan rigging of
electoral districts and is not about to stop now: aWe are not going to >>>> go into a stinking contest with a skunkA"
That's cute.a But it does not address the reality of the situation.
You also don't want a skunk to grab you by the balls.a Very bad
situation.
The electoral college protects the rest of the country
from corrupt states.
Direct voting ensures a strong level of openness between citizens and
their government.
With direct democracy you get the apurestA type of democracy which isdirect voting and install term limits on all politicians and judges.
Everyone gets one direct vote. One man, or woman, one vote forpoliticians and judges to serve one single term of four years.
That would make political machines more powerful to the detriment
of individual politicians, and the voters who vote for them.
simple and does not involve any interpretation.
The problem is voter apathy. Some people are more likely to engage inProblem solved.
Which problem? because there's nothing in term limits or direct
voting of presidents that solves the problem of corrupt politics
other than to make it worse.
the political process if they believe their opinion will make a difference.
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 20:14:45 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/23/2025 10:07 PM, Pluted Pup wrote:
On 8/23/25 10:22 AM, Dude wrote:The key word is Transparency.
On 8/23/2025 6:51 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
All we need to do is abolish the Electoral College, grant individual
"SchwarzeneggerrCOs mission: Terminate partisan rigging of CaliforniarCOs >>>>> electoral maps
Former governor has long campaigned against partisan rigging of
electoral districts and is not about to stop now: rCyWe are not going to >>>>> go into a stinking contest with a skunkrCO"
That's cute.-a But it does not address the reality of the situation. >>>>> You also don't want a skunk to grab you by the balls.-a Very bad
situation.
The electoral college protects the rest of the country
from corrupt states.
Direct voting ensures a strong level of openness between citizens and
their government.
With direct democracy you get the rCypurestrCO type of democracy which isdirect voting and install term limits on all politicians and judges.> > Everyone gets one direct vote. One man, or woman, one vote for
politicians and judges to serve one single term of four years.
That would make political machines more powerful to the detriment
of individual politicians, and the voters who vote for them.
simple and does not involve any interpretation.
The problem is voter apathy. Some people are more likely to engage inProblem solved.
Which problem? because there's nothing in term limits or direct
voting of presidents that solves the problem of corrupt politics
other than to make it worse.
the political process if they believe their opinion will make a difference.
Why would I imagine my vote make a difference as one among 100 million
or so?
The reason for having a republic instead of a direct democracy is thata republic can have qualified informed people who have the time to investigate complex issues and make good decisions. That assumes
legislators will be honest and have the good of the nation at heart.
That might have been true of the us at the beginning. But not since.
Lincoln might have been a great inspiring president, but, "of the
people, for the people and by the people" was not even true in his
time. Yes, he was talking about the difference between having a king
and having an elected president. A noble idea that humans seem unable
to live up to.
The greeks tried direct democracy once. Nobody has tried it since.Would you give up watching game of thrones so you could study legal proposals?
On 8/25/2025 6:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 20:14:45 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote:We studied this in junior college: American Government 101
On 8/23/2025 10:07 PM, Pluted Pup wrote:Why would I imagine my vote make a difference as one among 100 million
On 8/23/25 10:22 AM, Dude wrote:The key word is Transparency.
On 8/23/2025 6:51 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
All we need to do is abolish the Electoral College, grant individual
"SchwarzeneggerAs mission: Terminate partisan rigging of CaliforniaAs >>>>>> electoral maps
Former governor has long campaigned against partisan rigging of
electoral districts and is not about to stop now: aWe are not going to >>>>>> go into a stinking contest with a skunkA"
That's cute.a But it does not address the reality of the situation. >>>>>> You also don't want a skunk to grab you by the balls.a Very bad
situation.
The electoral college protects the rest of the country
from corrupt states.
Direct voting ensures a strong level of openness between citizens and
their government.
With direct democracy you get the apurestA type of democracy which isdirect voting and install term limits on all politicians and judges.> > Everyone gets one direct vote. One man, or woman, one vote for
politicians and judges to serve one single term of four years.
That would make political machines more powerful to the detriment
of individual politicians, and the voters who vote for them.
simple and does not involve any interpretation.
The problem is voter apathy. Some people are more likely to engage inProblem solved.
Which problem? because there's nothing in term limits or direct
voting of presidents that solves the problem of corrupt politics
other than to make it worse.
the political process if they believe their opinion will make a difference. >>
or so?
The problem is voter apathy.
The key word is transparency. Direct voting has a strong level ofThe reason for having a republic instead of a direct democracy is thata republic can have qualified informed people who have the time to
investigate complex issues and make good decisions. That assumes
legislators will be honest and have the good of the nation at heart.
That might have been true of the us at the beginning. But not since.
Lincoln might have been a great inspiring president, but, "of the
people, for the people and by the people" was not even true in his
time. Yes, he was talking about the difference between having a king
and having an elected president. A noble idea that humans seem unable
to live up to.
openness between citizens and the government. Direct democracy ensures
that the will of the people is clear.
The greeks tried direct democracy once. Nobody has tried it since.Would you give up watching game of thrones so you could study legal
proposals?
Apparently, the European Parliament has been directly elected every five >years since 1979.
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 10:10:36 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/25/2025 6:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 20:14:45 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote:We studied this in junior college: American Government 101
On 8/23/2025 10:07 PM, Pluted Pup wrote:
On 8/23/25 10:22 AM, Dude wrote:The key word is Transparency.
On 8/23/2025 6:51 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:The electoral college protects the rest of the country
-a>
"SchwarzeneggerrCOs mission: Terminate partisan rigging of CaliforniarCOs
electoral maps
Former governor has long campaigned against partisan rigging of
electoral districts and is not about to stop now: rCyWe are not going to
go into a stinking contest with a skunkrCO"
That's cute.-a But it does not address the reality of the situation. >>>>>>> You also don't want a skunk to grab you by the balls.-a Very bad >>>>>>> situation.
All we need to do is abolish the Electoral College, grant individual >>>>>
from corrupt states.
Direct voting ensures a strong level of openness between citizens and
their government.
With direct democracy you get the rCypurestrCO type of democracy which is >>>> simple and does not involve any interpretation.direct voting and install term limits on all politicians and judges. >>>>> > > Everyone gets one direct vote. One man, or woman, one vote for >>>>>> politicians and judges to serve one single term of four years.
That would make political machines more powerful to the detriment
of individual politicians, and the voters who vote for them.
The problem is voter apathy. Some people are more likely to engage inProblem solved.
Which problem? because there's nothing in term limits or direct
voting of presidents that solves the problem of corrupt politics
other than to make it worse.
the political process if they believe their opinion will make a difference.
Why would I imagine my vote make a difference as one among 100 million
or so?
The problem is voter apathy.
And you don't seem to have a solution for that.
The key word is transparency. Direct voting has a strong level ofThe reason for having a republic instead of a direct democracy is thata republic can have qualified informed people who have the time to
investigate complex issues and make good decisions. That assumes
legislators will be honest and have the good of the nation at heart.
That might have been true of the us at the beginning. But not since.
Lincoln might have been a great inspiring president, but, "of the
people, for the people and by the people" was not even true in his
time. Yes, he was talking about the difference between having a king
and having an elected president. A noble idea that humans seem unable
to live up to.
openness between citizens and the government. Direct democracy ensures
that the will of the people is clear.
What makes you think that there is any way a government is going to
allow you to know what it does not want you to know?
Apparently, the European Parliament has been directly elected every fiveWould you give up watching game of thrones so you could study legalThe greeks tried direct democracy once. Nobody has tried it since.
proposals?
years since 1979.
Which makes it a republic. You really aren't talking about direct
democracy are you?
On 8/25/2025 10:57 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 10:10:36 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote:The US Congress already has direct voting, so I'm suggesting a direct
On 8/25/2025 6:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 20:14:45 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>We studied this in junior college: American Government 101
On 8/23/2025 10:07 PM, Pluted Pup wrote:
On 8/23/25 10:22 AM, Dude wrote:The key word is Transparency.
On 8/23/2025 6:51 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:The electoral college protects the rest of the country
a>
"SchwarzeneggerAs mission: Terminate partisan rigging of CaliforniaAs >>>>>>>> electoral maps
Former governor has long campaigned against partisan rigging of >>>>>>>> electoral districts and is not about to stop now: aWe are not going to >>>>>>>> go into a stinking contest with a skunkA"
That's cute.a But it does not address the reality of the situation. >>>>>>>> You also don't want a skunk to grab you by the balls.a Very bad >>>>>>>> situation.
All we need to do is abolish the Electoral College, grant individual >>>>>>
from corrupt states.
Direct voting ensures a strong level of openness between citizens and >>>>> their government.
With direct democracy you get the apurestA type of democracy which is >>>>> simple and does not involve any interpretation.direct voting and install term limits on all politicians and judges. >>>>>> > > Everyone gets one direct vote. One man, or woman, one vote for >>>>>>> politicians and judges to serve one single term of four years.
That would make political machines more powerful to the detriment
of individual politicians, and the voters who vote for them.
The problem is voter apathy. Some people are more likely to engage in >>>>> the political process if they believe their opinion will make a difference.Problem solved.
Which problem? because there's nothing in term limits or direct
voting of presidents that solves the problem of corrupt politics
other than to make it worse.
Why would I imagine my vote make a difference as one among 100 million >>>> or so?
The problem is voter apathy.
And you don't seem to have a solution for that.
The key word is transparency. Direct voting has a strong level ofThe reason for having a republic instead of a direct democracy is that >>>> a republic can have qualified informed people who have the time toinvestigate complex issues and make good decisions. That assumes
legislators will be honest and have the good of the nation at heart.
That might have been true of the us at the beginning. But not since.
Lincoln might have been a great inspiring president, but, "of the
people, for the people and by the people" was not even true in his
time. Yes, he was talking about the difference between having a king
and having an elected president. A noble idea that humans seem unable >>>> to live up to.
openness between citizens and the government. Direct democracy ensures
that the will of the people is clear.
What makes you think that there is any way a government is going to
allow you to know what it does not want you to know?
vote for US President.
The key word is transparency. That's how you get openness between
citizens and the government.
Abolish the Electoral College, which is just a compromise between
electing the president through a direct popular vote and an election by >Congress.
Apparently, the European Parliament has been directly elected every five >>> years since 1979.Would you give up watching game of thrones so you could study legalThe greeks tried direct democracy once. Nobody has tried it since.
proposals?
Which makes it a republic. You really aren't talking about direct
democracy are you?
Apparently, there's no difference between a Democracy and a Republic, >according to Plato. Direct democracy is the purest form of democracy
One vote for every registered voting citizen.--
Abolish the
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 11:40:50 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/25/2025 10:57 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 10:10:36 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote:The US Congress already has direct voting, so I'm suggesting a direct
On 8/25/2025 6:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 20:14:45 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>We studied this in junior college: American Government 101
On 8/23/2025 10:07 PM, Pluted Pup wrote:
On 8/23/25 10:22 AM, Dude wrote:The key word is Transparency.
On 8/23/2025 6:51 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:The electoral college protects the rest of the country
-a>
"SchwarzeneggerrCOs mission: Terminate partisan rigging of CaliforniarCOs
electoral maps
Former governor has long campaigned against partisan rigging of >>>>>>>>> electoral districts and is not about to stop now: rCyWe are not going to
go into a stinking contest with a skunkrCO"
That's cute.-a But it does not address the reality of the situation. >>>>>>>>> You also don't want a skunk to grab you by the balls.-a Very bad >>>>>>>>> situation.
All we need to do is abolish the Electoral College, grant individual >>>>>>>
from corrupt states.
Direct voting ensures a strong level of openness between citizens and >>>>>> their government.
With direct democracy you get the rCypurestrCO type of democracy which isdirect voting and install term limits on all politicians and judges. >>>>>>> > > Everyone gets one direct vote. One man, or woman, one vote for >>>>>>>> politicians and judges to serve one single term of four years. >>>>>>>>
That would make political machines more powerful to the detriment >>>>>>> of individual politicians, and the voters who vote for them.
simple and does not involve any interpretation.
The problem is voter apathy. Some people are more likely to engage in >>>>>> the political process if they believe their opinion will make a difference.Problem solved.
Which problem? because there's nothing in term limits or direct
voting of presidents that solves the problem of corrupt politics >>>>>>> other than to make it worse.
Why would I imagine my vote make a difference as one among 100 million >>>>> or so?
The problem is voter apathy.
And you don't seem to have a solution for that.
The key word is transparency. Direct voting has a strong level ofThe reason for having a republic instead of a direct democracy is that >>>>> a republic can have qualified informed people who have the time toinvestigate complex issues and make good decisions. That assumes
legislators will be honest and have the good of the nation at heart. >>>>> That might have been true of the us at the beginning. But not since. >>>>> Lincoln might have been a great inspiring president, but, "of the
people, for the people and by the people" was not even true in his
time. Yes, he was talking about the difference between having a king >>>>> and having an elected president. A noble idea that humans seem unable >>>>> to live up to.
openness between citizens and the government. Direct democracy ensures >>>> that the will of the people is clear.
What makes you think that there is any way a government is going to
allow you to know what it does not want you to know?
vote for US President.
The key word is transparency. That's how you get openness between
citizens and the government.
Do citizens have openness and transparency with members of congress. I
think it would work better if all political parties were abolished and candidates chosen by popular vote. First round establishes the
candidates. Next round, or the next picks the winner. Some countries
do it that way. Not possible in the us, I think.
Abolish the Electoral College, which is just a compromise between
electing the president through a direct popular vote and an election by
Congress.
No it is not such a compromise. It is an attempt to put a check on
the tendency of demagogues to capture the popular fantasy. In
practice it does not serve that purpose and has been weakened by
successive governments over the years who do not want it to serve that purpose.
Apparently, there's no difference between a Democracy and a Republic,Apparently, the European Parliament has been directly elected every five >>>> years since 1979.proposals?The greeks tried direct democracy once. Nobody has tried it since. >>>>> Would you give up watching game of thrones so you could study legal
Which makes it a republic. You really aren't talking about direct
democracy are you?
according to Plato. Direct democracy is the purest form of democracy
What did plato know about modern political realities?
One vote for every registered voting citizen.
On 8/25/2025 11:48 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 11:40:50 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote:Let's be clear: People are more likely to engage in the political
On 8/25/2025 10:57 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 10:10:36 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>The US Congress already has direct voting, so I'm suggesting a direct
On 8/25/2025 6:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 20:14:45 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>We studied this in junior college: American Government 101
On 8/23/2025 10:07 PM, Pluted Pup wrote:
On 8/23/25 10:22 AM, Dude wrote:The key word is Transparency.
On 8/23/2025 6:51 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:The electoral college protects the rest of the country
a>
"SchwarzeneggerAs mission: Terminate partisan rigging of CaliforniaAs
electoral maps
Former governor has long campaigned against partisan rigging of >>>>>>>>>> electoral districts and is not about to stop now: aWe are not going to
go into a stinking contest with a skunkA"
That's cute.a But it does not address the reality of the situation. >>>>>>>>>> You also don't want a skunk to grab you by the balls.a Very bad >>>>>>>>>> situation.
All we need to do is abolish the Electoral College, grant individual >>>>>>>>
from corrupt states.
Direct voting ensures a strong level of openness between citizens and >>>>>>> their government.
With direct democracy you get the apurestA type of democracy which is >>>>>>> simple and does not involve any interpretation.direct voting and install term limits on all politicians and judges. >>>>>>>> > > Everyone gets one direct vote. One man, or woman, one vote for >>>>>>>>> politicians and judges to serve one single term of four years. >>>>>>>>>
That would make political machines more powerful to the detriment >>>>>>>> of individual politicians, and the voters who vote for them.
The problem is voter apathy. Some people are more likely to engage in >>>>>>> the political process if they believe their opinion will make a difference.Problem solved.
Which problem? because there's nothing in term limits or direct >>>>>>>> voting of presidents that solves the problem of corrupt politics >>>>>>>> other than to make it worse.
Why would I imagine my vote make a difference as one among 100 million >>>>>> or so?
The problem is voter apathy.
And you don't seem to have a solution for that.
The key word is transparency. Direct voting has a strong level ofThe reason for having a republic instead of a direct democracy is that >>>>>> a republic can have qualified informed people who have the time to >>>>>> investigate complex issues and make good decisions. That assumeslegislators will be honest and have the good of the nation at heart. >>>>>> That might have been true of the us at the beginning. But not since. >>>>>> Lincoln might have been a great inspiring president, but, "of the
people, for the people and by the people" was not even true in his >>>>>> time. Yes, he was talking about the difference between having a king >>>>>> and having an elected president. A noble idea that humans seem unable >>>>>> to live up to.
openness between citizens and the government. Direct democracy ensures >>>>> that the will of the people is clear.
What makes you think that there is any way a government is going to
allow you to know what it does not want you to know?
vote for US President.
The key word is transparency. That's how you get openness between
citizens and the government.
Do citizens have openness and transparency with members of congress. I
think it would work better if all political parties were abolished and
candidates chosen by popular vote. First round establishes the
candidates. Next round, or the next picks the winner. Some countries
do it that way. Not possible in the us, I think.
Abolish the Electoral College, which is just a compromise between
electing the president through a direct popular vote and an election by
Congress.
No it is not such a compromise. It is an attempt to put a check on
the tendency of demagogues to capture the popular fantasy. In
practice it does not serve that purpose and has been weakened by
successive governments over the years who do not want it to serve that
purpose.
Apparently, there's no difference between a Democracy and a Republic,Apparently, the European Parliament has been directly elected every five >>>>> years since 1979.The greeks tried direct democracy once. Nobody has tried it since. >>>>>> Would you give up watching game of thrones so you could study legal >>>>>> proposals?
Which makes it a republic. You really aren't talking about direct
democracy are you?
according to Plato. Direct democracy is the purest form of democracy
What did plato know about modern political realities?
process if they believe their opinion will make a difference.
Direct voting will demonstrate the wishes of the people who vote. So,
the government will have a clear directive to act.
Who know what the Electoral College is thinking? Nobody know for sure. >That's why people don't vote in presidential election - it's too secretive.
Most people don't even know what the Electoral College is!
One vote for every registered voting citizen.
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 13:39:09 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/25/2025 11:48 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 11:40:50 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote:Let's be clear: People are more likely to engage in the political
On 8/25/2025 10:57 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 10:10:36 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>The US Congress already has direct voting, so I'm suggesting a direct
On 8/25/2025 6:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 20:14:45 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>We studied this in junior college: American Government 101
On 8/23/2025 10:07 PM, Pluted Pup wrote:
On 8/23/25 10:22 AM, Dude wrote:The key word is Transparency.
On 8/23/2025 6:51 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:The electoral college protects the rest of the country
-a>
"SchwarzeneggerrCOs mission: Terminate partisan rigging of CaliforniarCOs
electoral maps
Former governor has long campaigned against partisan rigging of >>>>>>>>>>> electoral districts and is not about to stop now: rCyWe are not going to
go into a stinking contest with a skunkrCO"
That's cute.-a But it does not address the reality of the situation.
You also don't want a skunk to grab you by the balls.-a Very bad >>>>>>>>>>> situation.
All we need to do is abolish the Electoral College, grant individual >>>>>>>>>
from corrupt states.
Direct voting ensures a strong level of openness between citizens and >>>>>>>> their government.
With direct democracy you get the rCypurestrCO type of democracy which isdirect voting and install term limits on all politicians and judges. >>>>>>>>> > > Everyone gets one direct vote. One man, or woman, one vote for
politicians and judges to serve one single term of four years. >>>>>>>>>>
That would make political machines more powerful to the detriment >>>>>>>>> of individual politicians, and the voters who vote for them. >>>>>>>>>
simple and does not involve any interpretation.
The problem is voter apathy. Some people are more likely to engage in >>>>>>>> the political process if they believe their opinion will make a difference.Problem solved.
Which problem? because there's nothing in term limits or direct >>>>>>>>> voting of presidents that solves the problem of corrupt politics >>>>>>>>> other than to make it worse.
Why would I imagine my vote make a difference as one among 100 million >>>>>>> or so?
The problem is voter apathy.
And you don't seem to have a solution for that.
The key word is transparency. Direct voting has a strong level ofThe reason for having a republic instead of a direct democracy is that >>>>>>> a republic can have qualified informed people who have the time to >>>>>>> investigate complex issues and make good decisions. That assumes >>>>>>> legislators will be honest and have the good of the nation at heart. >>>>>>> That might have been true of the us at the beginning. But not since. >>>>>>> Lincoln might have been a great inspiring president, but, "of the >>>>>>> people, for the people and by the people" was not even true in his >>>>>>> time. Yes, he was talking about the difference between having a king >>>>>>> and having an elected president. A noble idea that humans seem unable >>>>>>> to live up to.
openness between citizens and the government. Direct democracy ensures >>>>>> that the will of the people is clear.
What makes you think that there is any way a government is going to
allow you to know what it does not want you to know?
vote for US President.
The key word is transparency. That's how you get openness between
citizens and the government.
Do citizens have openness and transparency with members of congress. I
think it would work better if all political parties were abolished and
candidates chosen by popular vote. First round establishes the
candidates. Next round, or the next picks the winner. Some countries
do it that way. Not possible in the us, I think.
Abolish the Electoral College, which is just a compromise between
electing the president through a direct popular vote and an election by >>>> Congress.
No it is not such a compromise. It is an attempt to put a check on
the tendency of demagogues to capture the popular fantasy. In
practice it does not serve that purpose and has been weakened by
successive governments over the years who do not want it to serve that
purpose.
Apparently, there's no difference between a Democracy and a Republic,Apparently, the European Parliament has been directly elected every five >>>>>> years since 1979.The greeks tried direct democracy once. Nobody has tried it since. >>>>>>> Would you give up watching game of thrones so you could study legal >>>>>>> proposals?
Which makes it a republic. You really aren't talking about direct
democracy are you?
according to Plato. Direct democracy is the purest form of democracy
What did plato know about modern political realities?
process if they believe their opinion will make a difference.
Why would I think such a stupid thing?
Sorry, you have not made your case.
On 8/25/2025 2:11 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 13:39:09 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/25/2025 11:48 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 11:40:50 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>Let's be clear: People are more likely to engage in the political
On 8/25/2025 10:57 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 10:10:36 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>The US Congress already has direct voting, so I'm suggesting a direct >>>>> vote for US President.
On 8/25/2025 6:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 20:14:45 -0700, Dude <punditster@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>We studied this in junior college: American Government 101
On 8/23/2025 10:07 PM, Pluted Pup wrote:
On 8/23/25 10:22 AM, Dude wrote:The key word is Transparency.
On 8/23/2025 6:51 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
a>
"SchwarzeneggerAs mission: Terminate partisan rigging of CaliforniaAs
electoral maps
Former governor has long campaigned against partisan rigging of >>>>>>>>>>>> electoral districts and is not about to stop now: aWe are not going to
go into a stinking contest with a skunkA"
That's cute.a But it does not address the reality of the situation.
You also don't want a skunk to grab you by the balls.a Very bad >>>>>>>>>>>> situation.
All we need to do is abolish the Electoral College, grant individual
The electoral college protects the rest of the country
from corrupt states.
Direct voting ensures a strong level of openness between citizens and >>>>>>>>> their government.
With direct democracy you get the apurestA type of democracy which is >>>>>>>>> simple and does not involve any interpretation.direct voting and install term limits on all politicians and judges.> > Everyone gets one direct vote. One man, or woman, one vote for
politicians and judges to serve one single term of four years. >>>>>>>>>>>
That would make political machines more powerful to the detriment >>>>>>>>>> of individual politicians, and the voters who vote for them. >>>>>>>>>>
The problem is voter apathy. Some people are more likely to engage in >>>>>>>>> the political process if they believe their opinion will make a difference.Problem solved.
Which problem? because there's nothing in term limits or direct >>>>>>>>>> voting of presidents that solves the problem of corrupt politics >>>>>>>>>> other than to make it worse.
Why would I imagine my vote make a difference as one among 100 million >>>>>>>> or so?
The problem is voter apathy.
And you don't seem to have a solution for that.
The key word is transparency. Direct voting has a strong level of >>>>>>> openness between citizens and the government. Direct democracy ensures >>>>>>> that the will of the people is clear.The reason for having a republic instead of a direct democracy is thata republic can have qualified informed people who have the time to >>>>>>>> investigate complex issues and make good decisions. That assumes >>>>>>>> legislators will be honest and have the good of the nation at heart. >>>>>>>> That might have been true of the us at the beginning. But not since. >>>>>>>> Lincoln might have been a great inspiring president, but, "of the >>>>>>>> people, for the people and by the people" was not even true in his >>>>>>>> time. Yes, he was talking about the difference between having a king >>>>>>>> and having an elected president. A noble idea that humans seem unable >>>>>>>> to live up to.
What makes you think that there is any way a government is going to >>>>>> allow you to know what it does not want you to know?
The key word is transparency. That's how you get openness between
citizens and the government.
Do citizens have openness and transparency with members of congress. I >>>> think it would work better if all political parties were abolished and >>>> candidates chosen by popular vote. First round establishes the
candidates. Next round, or the next picks the winner. Some countries >>>> do it that way. Not possible in the us, I think.
Abolish the Electoral College, which is just a compromise between
electing the president through a direct popular vote and an election by >>>>> Congress.
No it is not such a compromise. It is an attempt to put a check on
the tendency of demagogues to capture the popular fantasy. In
practice it does not serve that purpose and has been weakened by
successive governments over the years who do not want it to serve that >>>> purpose.
Apparently, there's no difference between a Democracy and a Republic, >>>>> according to Plato. Direct democracy is the purest form of democracyApparently, the European Parliament has been directly elected every fiveThe greeks tried direct democracy once. Nobody has tried it since. >>>>>>>> Would you give up watching game of thrones so you could study legal >>>>>>>> proposals?
years since 1979.
Which makes it a republic. You really aren't talking about direct >>>>>> democracy are you?
What did plato know about modern political realities?
process if they believe their opinion will make a difference.
Why would I think such a stupid thing?
Let's be clear: Millions of voters are stupid.
Sorry, you have not made your case.Not sorry, you have not mdae a case for indirect voting in the US. >presidential elections.
Apparently, the electoral college system is unique for the US. In most
other republics, you vote directly for the president.
In the US not everyone supports direct voting. Some people prefer
indirect voting, but either way, people are more likely to engage in the >political process if they believe their opinion will make a difference.
Direct elections will mobilize voters to get get informed and get out
and vote.